Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Organizational configuration

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. The is general agreement that the article is of poor quality at present, but there is no consensus to delete it. Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 00:02, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Organizational configuration

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

An essay not an article so OR. No indication of topic's notability as it's not clear where the topic comes from, so a neologism. Prodded but Prod tag removed without explanation. JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 08:06, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The four dimensions of distance - a related article probably created by the same group of SPAs, possibly as part of a college project. Also Transnational management strategies. andy (talk) 08:48, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral, leaning towards delete. This is actually the best or most promising of these project articles I've seen so far. It makes a bit of sense, and gives me a bit less of a headache trying to read it than the others do. Under a title like management structure, parts of this might make for a worthwhile article. But the opening sentence (Today’s companies are faced with strategic tasks emerging from the international operating environment.) all but shouts "I'm an unencyclopedic essay". It also shows the sort of meaningless but grandiose text (Did yesterday's companies not face these "tasks"? What makes them strategic? emerging? What is an international operating environement? Do all companies really "face strategic tasks emerging from the international operating environment?" What about Claire's Corner Copia?) If I were the professor grading this, and someone handed in a paper filled with this kind of patter, I'd give it a D at best; then again the class I would be teaching would be "Expository Prose 101" and not "How to Talk like a Management Consultant". But there might be a good overview in this worth saving under a less neologistic title. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 14:35, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Agree. Another concern is sourcing: a highly popular and diverse academic topic is reduced to a single source! Even if good old Henry Mintzberg is deemed obsolete, there are still hundreds of recent books to browse. NVO (talk) 04:20, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 14:38, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
About a weak keep as possible per WP:BARE. It is a bloody mess, but I can see how a decent article could be written about it. Google searches won't be useful here, as the term is both too common and jargon. Bearian (talk) 17:40, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It seems quite easy to find substantial sources which discuss this topic in detail such as The International Business Blueprint. If this draft needs improvement then our editing policy is to improve by editing not to delete it. Colonel Warden (talk) 14:08, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.