Deletion of Integral economics

Comment: I've made some efforts to clean this article up, but I must say it is still a bit of a mess. A lot of the article appears to be |synthesis, taking economics sources that don't mention Integral theory and interpreting them as saying things that support that theory, and taking Integral theory sources that don't talk about economics and interpreting them as applying to that subject. There does appear to be at least one source that specifically discusses economics and Integral theory together, but I'm not sure if it is enough to support a freestanding article. The best solution might be to merge the small amount of relevant material into the existing section on economics in the Integral movement article. Or perhaps there are other editors more familiar with the literature on this subject who could provide more relevant sources to flesh out a full article
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYN)

Comment: without prejudice to re-creation in lain English|English.  This would appear to be a |coatrack article designed to promote the views of the "Integral Institute", a think tank of dubious notability in itself, whose purpose (from that page) is "to gather and attempt to integrate the various viewpoints found in a number of major fields of knowledge. For example, the Integral Institute currently has a number of branches including Integral psychology, Integral business, Integral politics, Integral medicine, Integral education, Integral law and criminal justice, Integral art, and Integral spirituality."  Given this vague mandate, it isn't surprising that this article contains large swatches of content that  |no reasonable person can be expected to make sense of: ''Adapting the traditional lens of economics in favor of an integral approach might begin with a map (AQAL) utilized in concert with a vehicle or 'operating system' (IOS). Where the first affords a sense of orientation and familiarity with the terrain, the second provides the means of effectively communicating and actually traversing the territory.'' Google Scholar contains a number of hits, but it's by no means obvious that '''''any''''' of them are talking about this particular organization's views.  Whatever they are
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Portal (WP:P||WP:COATRACK||WP:NONSENSE)