Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Socially optimal firm size

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 no consensus. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:28, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Socially optimal firm size[edit]

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

Like Diseconomies of scale, this article appears to be original research. Only one doctoral dissertation seems to be available to support it and even that isn't used as a reference. Joja lozzo 01:45, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Both articles have references. If you want more, Google will find plenty. Somebody changed the title from Ideal firm size to it's current name, which I don't agree with. I'd like it changed back. StuRat (talk) 02:18, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, there are no references in this article. If you can supply some please do. Joja lozzo 02:22, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The References section was mistitled. Fixed now. StuRat (talk) 08:09, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, there is a References section but it is empty. Joja lozzo 02:51, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep Like diseconomies of scale this seems to be a drive-by nomination made without the due diligence required by WP:BEFORE. Warden (talk) 12:08, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I assure you this is not a drive-by nom. This article has the basic signatures of OR, especially the style and the lack of sources. Note that no one has added any sources since I proposed deletion. Joja lozzo 02:51, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:34, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Management-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:34, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:34, 28 November 2013 (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) 02:13, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, SarahStierch (talk) 01:16, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete My Google searches, including news and books, did not show this expression coming up much at all. There were instances where 3 or 4 of the words came up in the same paragraph, but nothing to show this is an established (notable) concept. If we have an article Optimal size it could redirect there, but even that is arguably just a dictionary definition of the words. Kitfoxxe (talk) 01:30, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and rename to Optimal firm size. GScholar shows 1,330 hits for "optimal firm size", 25 hits for "ideal firm size" and 6 results for "socially optimal firm size", so "optimal firm size" seems the most common phrase of the three for the topic. GScholar for "optimal firm size" shows multiple reliable sources dealing with the topic in depth; the topic seems notable. The article needs a lot of work, including sourcing, but is not so bad that we must blow it up per WP:TNT. A notable topic and an article with WP:SURMOUNTABLE problems suggests keeping the article. --Mark viking (talk) 04:18, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and rename per Mark viking

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.