Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alternative Portfolio Selection models

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was KEEP.

The votes were 8 delete, 6 keep. But the article got substantially rewritten during VfD, and only 1 delete vote was made after the rewrite.

Alternative Portfolio Selection models[edit]

Editor's note: has now been moved to Portfolio (finance)

Yeah, looks like a bunch of nonsense, Delete. --User:Boothy443 | comhrÚ 08:01, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)

  • Delete. If it weren't nonesense, it'd be original research.
  • Delete. Agreed, Nonsense. Battosai

Bacchiad 08:21, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)

  • Exactly what is the context? Nonsense, Delete. Mgm|(talk) 11:27, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete and comment: it does make sense... if you already know what it is about. But actually no point in having an article for that. Could be a few lines a financial or stock market article. Gtabary 15:29, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Original researched nonsense (you know what I mean) :)--Neigel von Teighen 18:14, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Nonsense. Ganymead 22:49, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Question: How does claiming that there are two current methods count as original research, let alone nonsense? Kappa 23:32, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep - This is not non-sense and it is not original research (or at least it has not been original research for 30 years now). It just needed a bit of a re-write, which I have just completed. mydogategodshat 06:34, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete.Mikkalai 08:01, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep or merge somewhere. Even the early versions were not really nonsense and subsequent rewrite gave more context. jni 08:42, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. Ok a I did bit of cleanup --- [0] edited Portfolio selection, management, and performance [1] merged info from portfolio [2] trimed portfolio [3] added a disambig link in portfolio [4] moved Portfolio selection, management, and performance to Portfolio (finance) [5] redirected Alternative Portfolio Selection model to Portfolio (finance) --- I think it's more rational now: better title, disambiged, merged from different sources. Gtabary 10:58, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete, still isnt encyclopaedic enough or useful. Megan1967 02:13, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I don't really care about the article nor am I knowlegable in finance. I cleaned it up because ther was some informations scatered around and the titles were so... bad. But I do see the article as encyclopaedic. There was and is material here, potentially expendable. So I don't understand you there. Gtabary 18:33, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • keep as cleaned up. Kappa 12:39, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. Especially as cleaned up, but even as it was first started, it was legitimate material. Come on guys if you don't know what something is, google it a little bit, don't jump on deleting. This is a very important topic in finance. - Taxman 14:14, Jan 29, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep as cleaned up, but could use a lot more work. -- Jmabel | Talk 18:21, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Alternative_Portfolio_Selection_models&oldid=49783381"