Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Business operations

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:41, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Business operations

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

unsourced disputable definition of the term fgnievinski (talk) 22:29, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: topic is almost certainly notable, the article has poor sourcing but that can be fixed Noah ^💬 22:34, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

the term is notable, but the particular definition is not; this is causing great confusion in incoming links. fgnievinski (talk) 23:38, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete — we’re skirting the edges of WP:NOTDICT (along with a touch of a circular definition), with this one, IMHO. Also, the sources… sources 1 and 3 don’t seem to reference “business operations” at all, unless I’m very much mistaken, so… WP:OR, as well? Perhaps if a business major/SME could step-in, re-work the article with some better sources… but for now, it’s a delete, for me. I don’t disagree that the article could be fixed, per Noah’s contention, but… now would be the time for that to happen.MWFwiki (talk) 01:37, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language and Business. Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 22:53, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Delete' as per MWFwiki above, as this hardly contains any encyclopedic information, especially when compared to similar business-related terms. The article seems to be filled with OR and seems to be written from a very narrow field of business, and thus as per fgnievinski resulting in some unwieldy incoming links. There does not yet appear to be a Wiktionary entry yet, but perhaps someone would start a stub over there, and then per WP:POINTWIKT we salt this page and point over there as the current article seems to attempt more at being a dictionary versus an encyclopedic entry. TiggerJay (talk) 15:50, 20 December 2024 (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.