Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AKD Group (2nd nomination)


 * 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 keep. Procedural outcome.DRV is the right way. (non-admin closure) Winged Blades of Godric On leave 17:47, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

AKD Group
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Delete I'm aware that it was recently nominated but only two participants + nom commented and none rebutted the argument put forward by the nom. For example, it may have subsidiaries but notability is not inherited - perhaps the subsidiary's notability might pass the criteria but that does not confer notability on the parent company. There are no indications that "AKD Group" is notable. References provided fail the criteria for notability and/or are not intellectually independent. Difficult to understand why previous AfD was closed as a "Keep" .... -- HighKing ++ 09:54, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 09:53, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 09:53, 20 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete as company or group clearly fails WP:CORPDEPTH and also not notable per WP:NOTINHERITED.  Greenbörg  (talk)  15:22, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep - per recently concluded AfD nomination. 'Notability is not inherited', doesn't apply here and WP doesn't say anything about reverse inheritance. Almost every headline on Alphabet Inc. carries Google's name yet we have that article. Sources were already provided in previous AfD. - Mfarazbaig (talk) 09:11, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Procedural keep and comment Umm, I am not sure what the purpose of this AfD is? It appears frivolous, knowing the prior nomination which was open to discussion for a reasonable period, and was closed only days before the 2nd. In any case, WP:DRV hasn't been correctly followed which outlines the process, so I'm going to have to conclude with a procedural keep.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 13:05, 23 September 2017 (UTC)


 * 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.