Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Immigrant entrepreneurship

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Immigrant entrepreneurship

[edit]
Immigrant entrepreneurship (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Potentially LLM written article that's mostly just an essay about a vague and broad topic instead of an article about a well established concept. "Immigrant entrepreneurship" can be anything. Cubnorth (talk) 23:33, 20 September 2026 (UTC)reply

  • Keep with reduction. Immigrant entrepreneurship is a widely accepted term and the subject of a substantial body of academic research. I rewrote the article in my sandbox, simplifying the prose and reducing its length by more than 50%, then replaced the live article. I also added a definition section to help clarify the concept. I believe the revised version addresses the concerns raised and is much more conducive to other editors expanding, restructuring, or rewriting the article as needed. The subject is specifically studied and tracked by organisations including the OECD, which includes a dedicated section of its International Migration Outlook 2 to the subject, and is the focus of a specific chapter in Elsevier's Handbook of the Economics of International Migration, among many other major academic publications. This is precisely the type of significant subject that Wikipedia should include. Its prominence can be quickly verified through searches of Google and JSTOR.
Wikipedia contains many obscure subjects that may legitimately warrant articles, but this is an established and important area of study that deserves inclusion because of it encompases such a broad range. The sources I have provided are all strong academic publications devoted again specifically to the subject. Even the source provided by ladmc, the German Historical Institute's Immigrant Entrepreneurship project covering immigrant entrepreneurship in American history broadly, reinforces the importance and established use of the term.
That said, although I am strongly opposed to LLM generated content, I recognise that my writing style may resonate with this issue. My writing also tends toward an essay style, which is something I have done professionally since long before AI existed and is a legitimate complaint by other editors. I am trying to work this out of my writing in general. I believe this may be partly because I develop highly polished articles. I made nearly 300 edits on Wikipedia developing this article, (not what you find in LLM generated content) and probably an equal amount of the work was done outside Wikipedia because I find it considerably easier to structure, move material around that way.
My proposed solution is the normal one for a notable subject where the article faces such concerns, that is to substantially reduce it. Over the next few days, during this discussion, I intend to shorten the prose considerably, probably by about half, while retaining as much of the existing structure and sourcing as possible.
One problem on Wikipedia is that articles can grow through incremental additions until they become sprawling and unorganised. I would like to leave this article with well developed structure but limited prose that makes it conducive to future contributions by other editors, while retaining the substantial academic sourcing that provides a foundation for future expansion. This is an approach I plan on taking in all of my future writing, limited prose with strong structure.
I appreciate the work done by all editors, including those critcal of my work JondeJon1 (talk) 13:05, 22 September 2026 (UTC)reply
I want to elaborate a little more as the nominator. There is no one unique thing that ties the information in this article together except for 'immigrants can be entrepreneurs'. This means that in my opinion, that's all the article is really saying. If the observations that followed were conclusive and uniform, then I'd understand a bit more, but as it stands almost all of them boils down to 'it varies', which is obvious. I respect that this is an area of interest for you, but as it stands I believe this topic is far too broad to be a useful article. Cubnorth (talk) 13:24, 22 September 2026 (UTC)reply
I understand the concern that the subject is broad, but I think that breadth is also what makes it valuable as an encyclopedia topic. Wikipedia benefits when it covers important central concepts, not just narrowly defined subjects. The study of immigrant entrepreneurship has considerable importance within sociology and social economics, which is why there is such substantial academic literature devoted to it.
The difficulty for me has been presenting the body of material without turning the article into an essay or adding my own synthesis. I could write a more cohesive argument connecting the research, but that would not be appropriate for Wikipedia. The article needs to be built from what the sources actually say, which can make it difficult to present the material cohesively.
At the same time, I am addressing the perception of LLM-assisted writing in the typical manner, by substantially reducing the prose and making the article more direct and source-focused. This often works against your concern, since reducing the prose can also make it harder to explain the connections among the research. I will post a rewritten version in the next few hours.
I understand where you are coming from, but I think this is a case where creative editing and restructuring can solve the problems. It would be a shame to lose an important area of study that belongs in an encyclopedia when the underlying subject and sourcing are very strong.JondeJon1 (talk) 08:05, 24 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Salvio giuliano 06:33, 28 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 11:45, 6 October 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Comment On a path forward: if the consensus is that the current article does not meet mainspace standards, I would ask that it be moved to draft space rather than deleted outright. This would allow me to reduce it to a stub, which is the standard remediation for articles with suspected LLM content, and to resubmit it through the Articles for Creation process. On the merge suggestion: merging with Middleman minority or Model minority would not be appropriate. Both of those are subsections of the broader topic of immigrant entrepreneurship rather than equivalent or parent concepts. JondeJon1 (talk) 17:15, 7 October 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Keep Frankly if both the suggested articles are subtopics within it then I'd argue we can use their notability to establish its. The notion of immigrant entrepreneurship necessarily derives from the sources that discuss them [referenced destination pages], and I know for a fact the topic is covered at length elsewhere. It's half the justification in the West for allowing in migrants/refugees (y'know, other than the fact that they're human beings and the notion of state boundaries is entirely arbitrary).
    CSGinger14 (talk) 01:56, 14 October 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Delete per NOLLM. The notability of this topic is secondary: there is no salvageable content in this article. Vanamonde93 (talk) 17:18, 15 October 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There's currently a rough consensus that this article falls short of notability guidelines, but there remains disagreement as to whether any of the content is salvageable through a merge. Further discussion as to whether a merge is worthwhile is encouraged; new participants are also welcome to make additional arguments towards keeping the article outright if they so choose
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 19:58, 15 October 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Delete, this fails NOLLM and any concerns about the notability are secondary. The AI user is avoiding saying outright that this is LLM-generated, and just talking around it with vague non-answers. If there's anyone that can say with certainty it is the account that has submitted it, but instead they are talking as if they can't possibly know. Just delete this, someone else is free to try to write a new article about this topic if they want to and can establish the notability of the topic. Lets not waste more time on this than we need to. ‑‑gurkubondinn 20:03, 15 October 2026 (UTC)reply

Comment @JondeJon1:'s comments have an AI vibe. AIs use "I (would) appreciate" a lot more than humans. Nononsense101 (talk) 20:50, 15 October 2026 (UTC)reply

@Nononsense101 There are other signs of AI usage, but I'd appreciate if you consider that I use that phrase frequently, as do a fair number of other people. Additionally, if JondeJon's telling the truth here that this was done over the course of 300 edits, you should look to those edits and their general character (i.e are there massive blocks of text added that are then whittled down to something that sounds less like AI (which seems to be the case here), or tons of little additions over time (which could ostensibly be AI notwithstanding), etc.). It's quite confusing nowadays, as a great number of Claude proficient newbies seem to want to get/profit from the output without doing the work, but end up doing a lot of work notwithstanding to clean up what ultimately amounts to nothing, because it's still relatively clear that they didn't create the initial draft.
I'm neutral on the AI question here. I'd rather editors just be upfront about it, cause we're a lot more forgiving if they are (not in terms of accepting the content as it stands, but rather not banning them outright, and letting them try again) than if they choose to hold steadfast to a poorly crafted lie. Ultimately it's more likely it just ends up getting washed away even if they're telling the truth (unfortunate, but somewhat necessary until we have better mechanisms for AI detection, or a broader change in the culture surrounding its use where people stop feeling as if output (whether for succeeding in one's mission or garnering repute) is more important than honesty), which should indicate to the people who are lying that they really don't stand to benefit from doing so.
@JondeJon1 though I really am sorry if you're telling the truth, this is probably your last chance to be honest if you're lying, as editors roundly seem to be confident that you are. It gets wiped regardless, but you'll have a lot more eyes on you after the fact if it gets voted down as NEWLLM with an explicit warning from the closer (which you probably won't receive if we manage to hash things out here). That's all I'll say.
CSGinger14 (talk) 07:14, 21 October 2026 (UTC)reply
@CSGinger14: There are more AI signs than I originally mentioned, including the persistent italicization of the word "specifically", the bolding of the phrase "proposed solution(they already bolded "Keep with reduction", so bolding "proposed solution and saying that their proposed solution is the normal one for a notable subject where the article faces such concerns is weird), and the usage of "at the same time". I know that this is not necessarily relevant to the AfD, but I posted it here because it is a reply to your comments. I would be open to starting an AINB on @JondeJon1:. Nononsense101 (talk) 16:24, 21 October 2026 (UTC)reply
Thank you, @CSGinger14. Your message is truly thoughtful. I would say that an article built through more than 300 edits, with so much research and time invested in it, is one created with care and attention, not by AI. At the same time, in between the occasional nastiness, there are several responsible editors like yourself, who think otherwise, and I respect that very much. I love Wikipedia and its democratic nature, but if it was not meant to be, so be it. I wanted to create valuable, well-sourced, and well-thought articles and I think I did that. I still think my few articles are better than most at my level. I am guilty of having a tendency to write essays, but I have no desire to fight accusations that even these comments were not written by me. In the end, it was not a waste, as every claim I wrote included something I learned. JondeJon1 (talk) 18:31, 21 October 2026 (UTC)reply
@JondeJon1: Why do you keep using "At the same time" in comments? Also, some of your drafts were declined for AI usage. Nononsense101 (talk) 19:09, 21 October 2026 (UTC)reply
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Immigrant_entrepreneurship&oldid=1381339771"