Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Financial deepening

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) Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 02:27, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Financial deepening

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

WP:NOTESSAY. This is just an essay full of original research and synthesis. DrStrauss talk 14:41, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Economics-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:50, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:30, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:31, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The term Financial Deepening is widely used and should have an article. However, I agree that the article was in a very essay like state. I've made a start at reorganising the article and added more references. Jonpatterns (talk) 19:02, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I've got a degree in economics and I've never heard the term. Then again, Ronald Reagan had a degree in economics and he could barely hold his own in a debate on economic policy with a house plant. The INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND THINKS "FINANCIAL DEEPENING" IS A THING, so who are we to argue? Passes GNG. I hate the article, for what it's worth. Carrite (talk) 06:54, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Standard term used in the literature e.g. Deepening and Nonbalanced Economic Growth FabianSinn (talk) 20:36, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the article may need some improvement but that doesn't invalidate it's notability. Real economic term and has been used by a number of RS as evidenced by my little search. — Ammarpad (talk) 05:25, 4 November 2017 (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.