Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Autonomous work group

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. W.marsh 21:16, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Autonomous work group

Is has been suggested that this is just a phrase. Mike 14:45, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

• Weak Keep I wanted to refer to an article on automous work groups. I understood it to be a business/industry concept in regular use in the 1980s-1990s. Apart from hearing the name quite a few times I've no knowledge of the term. I created a stub but someone else asked to delete, so I thought I'd put it up for debate

PS. I've used a different version of the AfD template:AfDU --Mike 14:51, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

• • Uncle G has added a lot more to the entry, so I'm now changing my vote, I think it is reasonable to expect an entry under this heading so I'm changing from a weak keep to definite keep!

--Mike 19:52, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

• • Comment - Some of the folks in my office were involved with companies using autonomous work groups during the 90s. However, from their descriptions, I am not sure that we need anything more than a dictionary definition to wholly cover the topic. Since I was still in middle school when the business practice went by the wayside, I abstain from voting and defer to my elders. :) -bobby 15:11, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete It is really just a dictionary entry. Emeraude 18:44, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

 AFD relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
 Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, KrakatoaKatie 13:51, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

• Strong Strong Keep - This is a real concept. The article needs some cleanup, i will see what I can do. I have studied this concept in classes. It is fascinating, and if i knew nothing about it and wanted some information on it, i would def come to Wikipedia. Losing this article would be a loss to wikipedia. Chris Kreider 14:23, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

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.