Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Active adult retail

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 delete. MBisanz ^talk 01:10, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Active adult retail

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

The article tries very hard to appear well-sourced, without actually being so. Many of the citations are broken links, blogs, personal sites, are not reliable[1] or do not actually mention "Active adult retail." Much of the article reads like an essay.

I came across the article as a paid editor making sure that research from the McKinsey Global Institute (MGI) is accurately represented on Wikipedia. This particular article appears to be trying to lend credibility to this concept by citing support from MGI that does not actually exist. I presume this report is what the article intended to cite, which is about baby boomers, but like much of the source material does not mention this related concept. David King, Ethical Wiki (CorporateM) (Talk) 21:42, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as this article is certainly questionable, no signs of improvements. Notifying DGG who may be interested to analyze this article's contents. SwisterTwister talk 01:53, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. It is probably a notable topic, but the first part of this is direct copyvio from http://activeadultretail.com, and the remainder reads as if it similarly is copyvio. DGG ( talk ) 06:31, 8 February 2016 (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.