Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cash taxes

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. — Aitias // discussion 02:32, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cash taxes

PROD was contested on the basis that it was USEFUL, which is not a valid reason for keeping. I see no evidence that this term is notable, nor do I see much chance of it being expanded beyond a DICTDEF. Also Wikipedia is not a how to guide. ThaddeusB (talk) 13:47, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- ThaddeusB (talk) 13:48, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep valid stub article Arma virumque cano (talk) This user has since been blocked as a sockpuppet. - ALLST✰R▼^echo _{wuz here @} 19:15, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This user's primarily contributions to Wikipedia have been to !vote (primarily delete) on dozens of AfDs approximately 1 minute apart from each other. See AN thread --ThaddeusB (talk) 19:03, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge anything useful to tax and redirect. McWomble (talk) 14:00, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. A quick Google search brings up some good results but this link appears to have a different definition (not sure if that's what the jargon means...!). JulieSpaulding (talk) 15:13, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you look closely, you'll notice that each link is talking about something different. That is because the term just means taxes paid in cash (as opposed to written of via deductions) and doesn't have any special meaning. --ThaddeusB (talk) 17:31, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~ as little more than a dicdef. Cosmomancer (talk) 16:11, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this user has been indefinitely blocked as a probable sock puppet of User:McWomble--ThaddeusB (talk) 23:03, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Strong delete. What we have in this article is a fragment of an exercise in writing indirect-methode cash flow statement. For those past the college bench, cash taxes, are, well, taxes paid, period. NVO (talk) 18:16, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It's a definition. We're not a dictionary. 'Nuff said.Tyrenon (talk) 20:35, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fragment with weak content Power.corrupts (talk) 20:50, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Add to Wiktionary.--The Legendary Sky Attacker 21:31, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as dicdef, possibly move to Wiktionary if needed. --Sable232 (talk) 03:37, 24 May 2009 (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.