356:: I guess I'd have to ask what specific features or events related to it make it notable? That is, if you have articles on ETF's and you have articles on the companies and the underlying securities, why single out this fund for its own article? If I start my own business that trades these stocks and the only coverage is my ads does that make my business notable by association with notable products? What about my own company that makes me-too widgets, even if widgets are notable or the first widget was notable is my company notable too?
256:
What "DJ Euro Stoxx 50" represents is the 50 most significant stock in the EU zone (all of which, I am sure, have their own Wiki entries), notable as they move markets. Would agree that the article should be fleshed out to describe criteria for inclusion in the list, the list itself (with a update
160:
121:
154:
192:
213:
This is a significant exchange traded fund with significant global daily volume and there is an exchange fund wikipedia category that without this entry would be incomplete--
234:
is notable. "DJ Euro Stoxx 50," independantly, is not. Having a category incomplete is not a reason for keeping an article. This entry is already listed on the
94:
89:
98:
81:
395:
is obviously notable and worth an article, but let's be careful not confuse the specific fund under discussion here with the index itself.
175:
142:
17:
257:
link), weighting and so on but as is this article should stand albeit that it could be improved upon to share more information.--
235:
136:
404:
384:
365:
345:
312:
292:
266:
247:
222:
204:
63:
419:
36:
132:
85:
361:
303:
No external sources, nothing to show that it has been discussed by reliable sources. Nothing to show notability.
182:
418:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
262:
218:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
77:
69:
392:
308:
400:
148:
357:
258:
214:
168:
322:
275:
380:
338:
288:
304:
238:; an full article does not need to be dedicated to this fund for the list to remain complete.
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
396:
243:
200:
54:
376:
331:
284:
115:
239:
196:
49:
48:. Stoxx 50 is notable, no indication that this fund meets the guidelines
231:
325:
to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
278:
to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
412:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
111:
107:
103:
167:
330:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
283:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
181:
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
422:). No further edits should be made to this page.
8:
193:Knowledge (XXG)'s notability guidelines
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
375:Pretty obviously fails notability --
24:
1:
236:List of exchange-traded funds
64:19:37, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
405:22:18, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
385:18:19, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
366:16:13, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
346:02:35, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
313:14:45, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
293:00:11, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
267:20:26, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
248:19:57, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
223:16:46, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
205:22:43, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
439:
415:Please do not modify it.
195:. It should be deleted.
78:IShares DJ Euro Stoxx 50
70:IShares DJ Euro Stoxx 50
32:Please do not modify it.
393:Dow Jones Euro Stoxx 50
228:Delete as nominator
191:This article fails
44:The result was
354:Notable for What?
348:
295:
430:
417:
341:
334:
329:
327:
282:
280:
186:
185:
171:
119:
101:
61:
52:
34:
438:
437:
433:
432:
431:
429:
428:
427:
426:
420:deletion review
413:
358:Nerdseeksblonde
339:
332:
320:
273:
128:
92:
76:
73:
55:
50:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
436:
434:
425:
424:
408:
407:
387:
369:
368:
350:
349:
328:
317:
316:
315:
297:
296:
281:
270:
259:Jemesouviens32
251:
250:
225:
215:Jemesouviens32
189:
188:
125:
72:
67:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
435:
423:
421:
416:
410:
409:
406:
402:
398:
394:
391:
388:
386:
382:
378:
374:
371:
370:
367:
363:
359:
355:
352:
351:
347:
344:
343:
342:
335:
326:
324:
319:
318:
314:
310:
306:
302:
299:
298:
294:
290:
286:
279:
277:
272:
271:
269:
268:
264:
260:
255:
249:
245:
241:
237:
233:
229:
226:
224:
220:
216:
212:
209:
208:
207:
206:
202:
198:
194:
184:
180:
177:
174:
170:
166:
162:
159:
156:
153:
150:
147:
144:
141:
138:
134:
131:
130:Find sources:
126:
123:
117:
113:
109:
105:
100:
96:
91:
87:
83:
79:
75:
74:
71:
68:
66:
65:
62:
60:
59:
53:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
414:
411:
389:
372:
353:
337:
336:
321:
300:
274:
253:
252:
227:
210:
190:
178:
172:
164:
157:
151:
145:
139:
129:
57:
56:
45:
43:
31:
28:
397:Barnabypage
155:free images
377:HighKing
323:Relisted
285:Tim Song
276:Relisted
122:View log
390:Comment
254:Comment
232:iShares
161:WP refs
149:scholar
95:protect
90:history
373:Delete
333:Jayron
301:Delete
240:Neelix
197:Neelix
133:Google
99:delete
46:delete
176:JSTOR
137:books
116:views
108:watch
104:links
16:<
401:talk
381:talk
362:talk
309:talk
289:talk
263:talk
244:talk
219:talk
211:Keep
201:talk
169:FENS
143:news
112:logs
86:talk
82:edit
183:TWL
120:– (
51:Ged
403:)
383:)
364:)
340:32
311:)
305:LK
291:)
265:)
246:)
230:-
221:)
203:)
163:)
114:|
110:|
106:|
102:|
97:|
93:|
88:|
84:|
58:UK
399:(
379:(
360:(
307:(
287:(
261:(
242:(
217:(
199:(
187:)
179:·
173:·
165:·
158:·
152:·
146:·
140:·
135:(
127:(
124:)
118:)
80:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.