Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carborundum Universal Limited


 * 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) Timotheus Canens (talk) 00:44, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Carborundum Universal Limited

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )


 * Delete per WP:CORP. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 19:38, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. The company has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. As well, the company is traded on the Bombay Stock Exchange. Most often, listed companies (those whose shares are traded on a recognized stock exchange) will have attracted enough media attention to demonstrate their notability, and this company is an example of that. - Eastmain (talk) 20:46, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  - Eastmain (talk) 20:46, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  - Eastmain (talk) 20:46, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep. Easily meets WP:CORP. Traded both in National Stock Exchange and Bombay Stock Exchange. Has substantial coverage in all major Indian financial papers.Business LineBusiness Line, Economic times, Mint, Business Standard Financial express. Same case with Business TV channels - CNBC TV18, NDTV profit, Bloomberg UTV (This is a popular mid cap scrip in the indian bourses. Any indian financial media that doesnt cover carborundum would not be doing its job properly). Again why was this nominated?--Sodabottle (talk) 21:11, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keepy Keepy per WP:CORP that was cited in the nomination. A very good reason for WP:Before. - Spaceman  Spiff  21:54, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep: Passes WP:CORP. Joe Chill (talk) 22:42, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep per all keep !votes above. Salih  ( talk ) 03:28, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - per Spiff. Shadowjams (talk) 07:40, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep: There's more than enough coverage to signify notability. Transmissionelement (talk) 18:33, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
 * 'Keep per WP:CORP. --68.127.232.132 (talk) 21:51, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep I am not sure on what basis this nomination could have been made--the nom. is a very responsible Wikipedian, but perhaps WP:BEFORE should be required to prevent us good guys from making this sort of error.    DGG ( talk ) 13:20, 28 December 2009 (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.