Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Heterogeneous activity

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. WP:SNOW The Bushranger _{One ping only} 02:21, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Heterogeneous activity

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

'Heterogeneous activity' is a phrase used throughout academia to mean various different things in various contexts (as a search on google scholar will show [1]). Even restricting ourselves to economics, 'heterogeneous activity' can mean a myriad of things.[2] The phrase is used when the author wants to emphasize that his model does not assume that actors are 'homogenous' in their behavior. Note that an article already exists about Homogeneity vs. heterogeneity.

The article specifies one possible use that is uncited, and likely not as notable as other uses of the term.

I don't believe an Encyclopedia article can be built around the use of the term in economics. Even it it could, it would mostly be about the use of homogeneous vs heterogeneous agents in economic models. LK (talk) 08:16, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Here are numerous high quality and relevant passages. The concept is extremely notable. For example, if all the farmers grow the same crop...as in potatoes, then there will be a famine if a disease is introduced. Homogeneous activity means that eggs are put in the same basket. That's why heterogeneous activity reduces the risk of system wide failures such as recessions or depressions. --Xerographica (talk) 08:45, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You have not provided evidence that all of your ... passages ... are about this specific use of the term in economics.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Arthur Rubin (talk • contribs)

Delete - The concept covers, ahem, quite a heterogeneous bag of unrelated examples. This is not suitable as an article topic (so I'd vote Delete) but it could work as a Disambiguation page if people would like to convert it into one of those. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:58, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or replace with a disambiguation page; possibly the lead might be usable for one of the disambiguated pages if there were a source for it. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 10:19, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The subject of the article is not meaningfully defined, and the words have no special meaning other than their ordinary English usage in any context. Not suitable for a disambiguation page. SPECIFICO talk 14:26, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete How would this term fit in the JEL classification codes? (It doesn't.) A quick search of Palgrave came up with 91 uses of the term in a wide variety of entries (over the numerous editions) – this suggests that it is a term which is simply descriptive in context where it is used. Adding various quotes, as was done here, is simply WP:Coatracking.--S. Rich (talk) 16:01, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Google News has plenty of hits, because heterogeneous activity could describe just about any activity with multiple causes or goals. I don't think a phrase like this has any specific meaning in economics or elsewhere as a term of art. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 16:52, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Clearly the AFD process needs to occur at the relevant projects...not in a general area. It's hardly a prefect solution...but it should hopefully cut down on editors editing well outside their areas of expertise. --Xerographica (talk) 01:53, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please recall the policy of No Personal Attacks. Civility is vital in discussions, regardless of — especially given — the undoubted failings of the rest of us. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:05, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:29, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:29, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - per others. Subject not well defined, no sources etc.Volunteer Marek 06:02, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not recommending a redirect to Homogeneity and heterogeneity considering the seeming WP:OR nature of the title of the AfD -- at least not until this can be proven its a legitimate name outside of WP:NEO. Mkdw ^talk 20:40, 31 January 2013 (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.