Talk:Manager's right to manage

It's difficult, people!

I have real difficulty seeing the lack of context when the words legitimation, production and capitalism are clearly available in the stub. Fifelfoo_m (talk) 06:10, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Theoretical claims are inherently more than a dicdef: they are not a thing that exists in the world, but an analysis of the world. Fifelfoo (talk) 23:47, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see anything here that merits a separate entry. The refs are also a little thin; the book chapter in particular mentions this term only in passing (and in scare quotes). Hairhorn (talk) 02:16, 18 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lmgtfy. It is extensively discussed separate from management. Fifelfoo_m (talk) 04:30, 18 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Asking for proper referencing is hardly evidence of "systematic bias" as you say in your edit summary, particularly when there is a single editor asking for them. This probably merits a merge elsewhere, at eg; Managerial prerogative, which appears to be closely related. Also, redlinks do not belong in the "See Also" section, see Wikipedia:Seealso#See_also_section. Hairhorn (talk) 15:51, 18 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

Suggest merge to Managerial prerogative, largely for reasons alluded to already; there's little here beyond a dicdef, and related pages already exist. Hairhorn (talk) 02:51, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the merger, the article is a stub and topic is being discussed in other articles.Righteousskills (talk) 20:05, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]