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 delete‎. ✗plicit 06:30, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Option screener[edit]

Option screener (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)

No real refs on the page for many years. Agree with the hathote from 2014 that it sounds like an essay and no significant improvement for a long time. It needs WP:TNT until someone can rewrite it in an encyclopedic way JMWt (talk) 07:14, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance and Economics. JMWt (talk) 07:14, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: This software appears to have shifted to various apps now [1] but sourcing is very much PR items and crypto blogs. Oaktree b (talk) 12:54, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - As the OP author, this article really shouldn't have been written. Kill it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ronnotel (talk • contribs) 20:27, 20 October 2023 (UTC) Comment moved from above debate header post-close by Daniel.[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.