Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Proactive contracting

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 merge to Proactive law#Proactive Law in a Business Context. Mark viking, not sure if it's on your watchlist, figured I'd courtesy ping since you rewrote the content. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 13:37, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proactive contracting

[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)

This essay consists mostly of meaningless jargon-laden marketing talk with the lingering odor of promotion. The sources are either dead links, wild goose chases, or serve only to synthesise the topic from sources not actually about it. This was proposed for deletion a month ago and since then neither I nor anyone else has been able to find sources from which to build a credible article. Reyk _YO! 11:06, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:40, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I have circled back to this topic. However I still cannot decide on the notability of the subject. Lightburst (talk) 18:38, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - only glancing mentions in the sources; several sources don't even mention the topic. A redirect to Proactive law is a cheap way out if you're not sure. Bearian (talk) 20:09, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Proactive law#Proactive_Law_in_a_Business_Context. I have completely rewritten the article, transforming into a referenced stub. There are sources out there, and in the article, that convinces me this is a real movement in contract law. I don't know if it rises to the level of GNG, but in any case, the stub content is verifiable and I think this stub is better merged into Proactive law, as proactive law and proactive contracting are quite tightly linked. With verifiable material and a good target article, merge is preferred over deletion per our policy WP:ATD. --{{u|Mark viking}} {Talk} 20:32, 2 April 2020 (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.