Talk:Sweatshop labor fallacy

This article was nominated for deletion on 8 September 2021. The result of the discussion was redirect.

August 2021

To suggest that anyone who has some kind of issue with low wages and poor working conditions is committing a fallacy is literally laughable. I think this article should be deleted. 108.16.202.225 (talk) 05:22, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I read the original sources cited for this page and it seems like the concept is touched upon in the econ book. As much as the argument is laughable and no matter how poor the authors reasoning is, I don't think the page should be deleted for that reason. What I do think, is that the concept is nowhere near as notable or interesting enough to have it's own wikipedia page. To keep the spirit of WP:NOR intact, I'd like to find some sources detailing how this ""fallacy"" is wrong, but it isn't even well known enough to have people disputing it. This further reenforces that this page should be deleted purely on the notability factor. AideTech (talk) 01:03, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Both cited sources are by the same author, and a quick google search seems to only turn up quizlet/coursehero type websites (probably made by students studying that textbook), and a few websites that simply copy the Wikipedia page. It seems to be a concept coined by that author and used only by them, which seems to fail the notability requirement. If this page is kept it definitely needs expansion, as it is not written from a neutral point of view . Sudonymous (talk) 08:12, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The main issue with this article is that it presents an argument by one author as fact. Obviously fails WP:NPOV with its wording and WP:Sourcing with its lack thereof. CentreLeftRight ✉ 08:57, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The term isn't what is widely accepted to be a fallacy and therefore misleads readers, it isn't notable, seems to be only used in literature in which Paul Krugman was the author or contributor, and is a non-neutral, loaded and subjective term which should be at the minimum attributed to whoever uses it for context. I think this is enough for this to be deleted, alongside pauper labor fallacy.BeŻet (talk) 16:18, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]