Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crescent Bahuman Limited
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:21, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Crescent Bahuman Limited (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
- Delete. Non-notable company. No redeeming encyclopaedic value. Reads like an advert or a business directory entry. Essentially spam by stealth. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 09:37, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 17:56, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 17:56, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 21:10, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. There are sources, but none are reliable or independent enough to establish notability. Fails the WP:GNG. Either misunderstands the guideline, or seeks to slip by it by providing enough references that no one cares enough to check. Vcessayist (talk) 01:28, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[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.