Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anticipatory democracy

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 keep. The concern expressed on the talk page is one regarding inaccuracy and OR. But, as Legis and Master&Expert have pointed out, there isn't a compelling reason to delete the article here: nobody is arguing that the article fails to meet the notability guidelines etc. If there are OR or accuracy concerns, that can be fixed by hitting the "edit" button... —Tom Morris (talk) 11:08, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Anticipatory democracy

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

Talk page calls for its deletion, and I don't see a reason to disagree. - Roy Boy 04:29, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Question/comment - What is the actual reason this should be deleted? You haven't given one. LadyofShalott 05:22, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I don't see a basis for deletion. Someone commented on the talk page that it all ought to be deleted on the basis of inaccuracy (not my field - don't know), but the subject itself seems sufficiently notable even if the content needs fixing. --Legis (talk - contribs) 08:32, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 11:04, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Plenty of sources mentioning it, see: gbook and gscholar search. Appears notable enough and article can be improved. MakeSense64 (talk) 14:20, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep — I'm confused as to what justification there may be for deleting this article. It seems like a notable enough concept for inclusion. Master&Expert (Talk) 14:39, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Appears to meet GNG from sources showing in the piece. Carrite (talk) 17:36, 8 December 2011 (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.