Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cognitive finance

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Sandstein 14:39, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cognitive finance[edit]

Cognitive finance (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not sure about this one - frankly I don't understand enough about economy to decide whether this is about an established and notable concept, or a new coinage. There only seem to be 2-3 authors who use the term "cognitive finance" per se (basically, Rapp - [1]), which makes me think that this is a big fat piece of WP:SYNTHESIS intended to generate notability where none exists yet. Financially savvy editors please have a look.

(The article needs major style cleanup in any case, but I'm ignoring that for now.) --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 14:19, 25 May 2018 (UTC) Elmidae (talk · contribs) 14:19, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:02, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Economics-related deletion discussions. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:02, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:02, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - as an offshoot of behavioural finance there might (someday) be enough for an article on this, but it wouldn't be this article, which includes great promises of "new science", railing at the limitations of economic theory (which most of us agree on) and nothing in the middle - the real work of science. It might be WP:OR or just BS. Who knows? So delete per WP:Not yet, or WP:Crystal, but don't salt. Smallbones(smalltalk) 00:33, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • The author (Ferikali) has added a comment on their talk page, which I am copying below:
Apparently, we cannot completely follow your argumentation on that subject. The concept and definition of Cognitive Finance was developed by Dr. Heinz-Werner Rapp, the founder of FERI Cognitive Finance Institute, which is a non-commercial think tank deploying the concept of cognitive finance. Furthermore, this concept aims to be a new capital market theory that is scientifically approached in a published book by Springer. However, the concept is not fully elaborated yet but we suppose that this concept will play an important role in the future, like behavioral finance 15 years ago. In sum, we hope to keep the article posted as we would like to raise awareness on that subject and find new and helpful thought that develop the concept even further.
I'd like to note that this pretty much confirms that there should not be an article on this topic at this point. Wikipedia does not cover things that are supposed to "play an important role in the future", that are "not fully elaborated yet", or that are added to "raise awareness" on the subject. All these intentions acknowledge that the subject is not yet sufficiently notable, and WP is not the forum to make it so. We'll cover it once it is (as demonstrated by substantial secondary coverage). Please have a look at WP:GNG, specifically at Wikipedia:Notability#Notable topics have attracted attention over a sufficiently significant period of time, and at WP:CRYSTAL.--Elmidae (talk · contribs) 10:40, 1 June 2018 (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.