Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Banco San Juan


 * 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. (non-admin closure) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 00:04, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Banco San Juan

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Notability not established per WP:COMPANY. Raykyogrou0 ( Talk ) 11:40, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Speedy close. WP:COMPANY states that "Editors coming across an article on such a company without such references are encouraged to search (or request that others search) prior to nominating for deletion, given the very high likelihood that a publicly traded company is actually notable according to the primary criterion." It appears this was not met, if that has been done, they a 2nd nomination may be pursued. – H T  D  12:06, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Have you even looked for sources yourself? Raykyogrou0  ( Talk ) 12:43, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
 * You're preaching to the choir, obviously. You're not even thorough with your searching and now you're telling us how to do it?  Please.  (And, oh yeah, per, I say Keep.) --Sky Harbor (talk) 08:44, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Please elaborate on how I wasn't "thorough" with my search. Raykyogrou0  ( Talk ) 09:12, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Close/Keep AFD isn't used as a clean up, Also per HTD. - →Davey 2010→ →Talk to me!→  18:55, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
 * This is about notability. Raykyogrou0  ( Talk ) 12:43, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Close/Keep - this campaign really isn't the way to go about things. Yes a prod may startle some editors into making large improvements to an article here by User:Seth Nimbosa, but that isn't the purpose of Prods or AFDs. It seems that at least half of the 20 or 30 banks prodded should simply have been improved, and the speed of drive by tagging of 20-30 articles, not having added a single banking source to any one, indicates an unhelpful focus on deletion rather than improvement. In ictu oculi (talk) 04:34, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
 * This "campaign" has more to do with the lack of notability of a majority of these articles. Raykyogrou0  ( Talk ) 12:43, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Close/Keep - Mr. Raykyogrou0  have you tried this search it turned out several articles and I will flesh them out in the article when I have the time, clearly some articles are a work in progress and they need attention from experts or hobbyists who have the time to actually maintain these topics, most are stub-like articles that should be  expanded and referenced  with much-needed content to be contributed.. the solution is NOT to delete them speedily.. notability is not all about references alone, most articles submitted for deletion are only badly maintained articles that need more attention, thanks for this kind of treatment, it had the unintended consequence of pulling me back to editing articles on the English wiki! --—-— .: Seth_Nimbosa :. (talk • contribs) 18:33, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Actually, those all talk about the banks acquisition by Banco de Oro. Nothing notable about this bank. Speedy deletion is different from AfD, btw.  Raykyogrou0  ( Talk ) 09:12, 16 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment. The comments saying "Speedy Keep" or "Close" are not actual speedy keep criterion.  Raykyogrou0  ( Talk ) 09:12, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:36, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:36, 17 January 2014 (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.