Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Multiple Equivalent Simultaneous Offers

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. (non-admin closure) Theo polisme 00:42, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple Equivalent Simultaneous Offers[edit]

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

WP:DICTIONARY -- simply the definition and "advantages" of a term. While it has sources and content it is, in the end, a term -- perhaps a move to Wiktionary? Theo polisme 22:00, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW, the article (when originally nominated for deletion) looked substantially different than it does now -- I'm in agreement that a keep is now appropriate. Theo polisme 00:42, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:02, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:02, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. It's a description of a technique, stating advantages of the technique (not of the label!). —Tamfang (talk) 00:24, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 23:08, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Per Tamfang. There is far more than pure dictionary content here. Having said that, the article needs to be categorized, wikified, and de-orphaned, and a merge to a suitable article such as negotiation could be considered.--Arxiloxos (talk) 02:03, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The article discusses the term from an encyclopedic standpoint, including its use as a strategy, it's advantages and scholarly research related to the term. Much more here than a dictionary definition. Northamerica1000^(talk) 05:30, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep? There's more there than a definition. The question mark is because possibly it should be merged into another article. North8000 (talk) 00:38, 8 October 2012 (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.