Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Engin 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 delete. –  Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 03:59, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Engin Limited

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I'd hate to nominate this as it's at least neat and sourced, better than other articles but what concerns me is the almost non-existent significant coverage (best of my searches here, here, here and here. Additionally, searches at Australian news found nothing outstandingly good here, here, here and here. SwisterTwister  talk  04:29, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. &mdash;&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·E·C) 04:39, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. &mdash;&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·E·C) 04:39, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete. There is no reason to think a company with this small number of customers is likely to be notable  DGG ( talk ) 19:34, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — ☮ JAaron95  Talk  03:52, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete per DGG: this is an article on a not very big or notable company Nick-D (talk) 08:57, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and above editors. Nothing in searches to show notability.  Onel 5969  TT me 14:00, 30 August 2015 (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.