Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Debt money: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 10:19, 28 December 2007

Debt money

This term is defined by Michael Rowbotham, who is not a recognised professional economist, the article itself seems to be a novel synthesis combining what recognised authorities say with what Rowbotham says to deliver a new whole. Google is no help here - all the hits I can find to reliable sources in a search for "debt money" have a punctuation mark between debt and money. Guy (Help!) 16:09, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and redirect If the concept in the article is directly from Rowbotham, I'd say merge it into his article. There is also a Debt-based monetary system which might be able to hold the concept. I'm inept and ignorant on financial issues, I figure an expert would be able to say if those ideas are feasible or within the realm. Yngvarr 16:25, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not convinced his article is any more worthy, to be honest. This, two other related articles and his article appear to be here solely to promote his ideology, which is not widely accepted and not, as far as I can tell, published in peer-reviewed sources. Guy (Help!) 16:52, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- It appears that his article is been prodded. Maybe wrap them all up into a single AFD? Wider discussion might be useful. If they're basically WP:FRINGE, there's no reason to keep any of his related articles if only a few of them end up deleted. Yngvarr 17:02, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - It has already been through AFD. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Debt-based monetary system. Uncle G (talk) 20:13, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Debt-based monetary system? Sorry I'm not an expert on this subject but there looks like there are a good number of third party references available in that article. Coccyx Bloccyx (talk) 20:23, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep / Merge: Please see also the discussion at debt-based monetary system's talk page. There appear to be many references, but most of them are, to me, not reliable sources. Many of the references have also been grossly misused (hyperbole and claims not in the references, quoting a source in a way that implies the source agrees with the premise or has ever used the expression debt-based money, POV, etc). Most of the sources boil down to Rowbotham and a few other fringe sources. The only reason I'm for a weak keep is that I'm concerned this subject will show up again and again, and it would be better to have an article clearly identifying this subject as monetary crankism. (I would, by the way, be grateful for editors to beat back and cut back the thick underbrush by deleting text they feel doesn't meet the standards; I don't want to be the only one, but the content is mostly nonsense). At any rate, there should not be a bunch of articles on this obscure concept and phrasing. Perhaps one.--Gregalton (talk) 20:54, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete/Merge to Money The whole topic of fringe monetary theories is a difficult one. Although such theories are fairly marginal these days, they played a big political role in movements like Social Credit. JQ (talk) 22:45, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete/Merge to Debt-based monetary system or credit money. That article does have problems described by various templates, but it does attempt to describe a theory underlying credit money and free banking, just needs to be a lot shorter and less reliant on one source since there are others.

Carol Moore 02:42, 28 December 2007 (UTC)CarolMooreDC talk

I am an expert. I can't tell you how many Economics Prizes and Awards I won at university. I lost count. Debt money correctly reflects Michael Rowbotham's terminology and those who wish to delete the term should read his book before commenting further. Austrian Economists often refer to the concept as "fiat money". Rowbotham was really the first to refer to it repeatedly and consistently as debt money or money created in parallel with debt. I vote to keep it in. It is an incredibly minor entry, certainly not as important as Homer Simpson, or Nintendo Wii or anal sex, all of which are proudly listed as WP entries. Surely this tiny entry can stay in for the benefit of those few who actually have an interest in Rowbotham's works. Which is probably around 8 people in the world. If this gets deleted, I have about 500,000 other "rubbish" non-encyclopedic entries that URGENTLY need deletion too.--Karmaisking (talk) 10:19, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 13: / Line 13: @@
 * '''Delete/Merge to [[Debt-based monetary system]] or [[credit money]]'''. That article does have problems described by various templates, but it does attempt to describe a theory underlying credit money and free banking, just needs to be a lot shorter and less reliant on one source since there are others.
 Carol Moore 02:42, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[[User:Carolmooredc|CarolMooreDC]] [[User talk:Carolmooredc|talk]]
+::: I am an expert.  I can't tell you how many Economics Prizes and Awards I won at university.  I lost count.  Debt money correctly reflects Michael Rowbotham's terminology and those who wish to delete the term should read his book before commenting further.  Austrian Economists often refer to the concept as "fiat money".  Rowbotham was really the first to refer to it repeatedly and consistently as debt money or money created in parallel with debt.  I vote to keep it in.  It is an incredibly minor entry, certainly not as important as [[Homer Simpson]], or [[Nintendo Wii]] or [[anal sex]], all of which are proudly listed as WP entries.  Surely this tiny entry can stay in for the benefit of those few who actually have an interest in Rowbotham's works.  Which is probably around 8 people in the world.  If this gets deleted, I have about 500,000 other "rubbish" non-encyclopedic entries that URGENTLY need deletion too.--[[User:Karmaisking|Karmaisking]] ([[User talk:Karmaisking|talk]]) 10:19, 28 December 2007 (UTC)