Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Concept of money

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 of the debate was delete and redirect to Money. Mailer Diablo 00:48, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Concept of money

Wiktionary has an entry for concept of money. De-prodded with no other edits or cleanup. James084 01:22, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well I'm not an economist, but I thought it was improperly prodded. It seems like a concept that needs a explanation with examples, context in economic theory etc. It doesn't say on the prod page that you have to make an article perfect when you remove the tag and it seems there is something here that needs more than a dictionary definition. As a mere definition it is pretty useless to a layman, but properly expanded it might be a useful part of Wikipedia's coverage of economics. Calsicol 01:39, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This has been transwikied word-for-word to Wiktionary:concept of money. Per WP:TL 1.1, the next step is to vote to delete via this AfD, and the closing admin should replace the page with the following boilerplate text: ''The contents of this page and the page's history have been moved to [[interwiki:Transwiki:Article Name]] via the [[m:transwiki|transwiki]] system, all future edits should go there.'' ~~~~ I concur. --Aaron 01:46, 20 February 2006 (UTC) Changing rationale for my vote per removal of Wiktionary article: Delete as failing WP:V. --Aaron 01:40, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The wiktionary entry appears to be a copyvio of the wikipedia article. Kappa 01:49, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Huh? -- Jonel | Speak 02:27, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I believe the GFDL requires the edit history to be preserved. Kappa 02:58, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed. See wikt:Talk:concept of money. -- Jonel | Speak 05:43, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
delete, I don't believe concept of money to have a distinct meaning from the sum of its parts. Will change my mind if evidence to the contrary can be produced. The wiktionary entry should go too. Kappa 02:00, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I concur with Kappa on this article's place or lack thereof on Wikipedia. -- Jonel | Speak 05:43, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete in as much as I understand the technicalities here. Guy 10:14, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It just says there is such a thing as a concept of money but doesn't tell us what it is --Ruby 14:27, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It's been transwikied Avi 16:07, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, then redirect to Money which does and should contain a discussion of the theoretical basis of money. That's what this article would have eventually come to contain, so its best to redirect to prevent this from being created in the wrong place in the future. savidan^{(talk) (e@)} 21:01, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: It appears the wikitionary article disappeared. --AySz88^-^ 22:43, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Wiktionary deletion log -- Jonel | Speak 22:59, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - wikt:Wiktionary:Requests_for_verification#concept_of_money (a well-deleted GFDL-compliant article ;) btw, now that Wiktionary has deleted, I agree with Savidan's redirect rather than standard Transwiki boilerplate.) -- Jonel | Speak 00:43, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and redirect - Cuñado - Talk 00:26, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or redirect. I agree that a discussion of the theoretical issues with the standard definition of money (i.e., its function as a unit of account and the modeling shortcomings therein) would be best suited as a paragraph or so in the money article. (Maybe I'll even take a crack at it someday...) --Kinu ^t/_c 01:24, 23 February 2006 (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.