Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Al-Mawarid Bank S.A.L.


 * 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. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  02:17, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Al-Mawarid Bank S.A.L.

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

I can't find any reliable sources that show notability. Schuy m 1 ( talk ) 22:57, 14 October 2008 (UTC) 
 * Delete. No claim of notability, no third-party references. Bongomatic (talk) 23:26, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.   --  TwentiethApril1986   (want to talk?)  01:22, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:30, 19 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep Delete the one sentence article as failing notability. if gets sourcing and expansion... otherwise its just one sentence about a bank.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 01:02, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep A Google search turns up media coverage that confirms notability: . The article needs expanding, not erasure. Ecoleetage (talk) 03:02, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Which Google hits do you think demonstrate notability? Bongomatic (talk) 07:45, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Fitch Research Report is published by Fitch Ratings, which is a major financial information resource. If Fitch offers confirmation, it is (pardon the obvious pun) money in the bank. Also, remember that this is a Lebanese bank, so there will probably be a minimal amount of English-language media coverage (I would invite anyone with access to the Arabic language version of Google to confirm the subject's notability via that search engine). Ecoleetage (talk) 22:26, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Fitch rates thousands (or maybe tens or hundreds of thousands) of entities--some of them notable, most of them not. Fitch rates everything from multinationals to single-purpose vehicles, almost none of the latter of which is notable. Bongomatic (talk) 23:00, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry to contradict you, but you are offering a subjective opinion of Fitch (especially in relation to its ratings of international financial institutions). If this bank was not notable, Fitch would not waste its time on it. Ecoleetage (talk) 17:22, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry to contradict you, but you don't seem to be informed as to what rating agencies do. They (for a fee) rate companies so that such companies may borrow money. This is not a test of notability, but whether people want to finance a company. Being able to obtain debt financing or being rated is not a proxy for notability. Bongomatic (talk) 22:08, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I guess we will just have to agree to disagree on this and allow our friends on the project to join the discussion and weigh in on the merits of the article. :) Ecoleetage (talk) 04:41, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Delete. As is, it doesn't show anything to make it notable. Maybe if the article was expanded, I'd change my vote, but as is, it should go. Niteshift36 (talk) 20:44, 21 October 2008 (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.