Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grupo Garza Ponce


 * 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The result was withdrawn. Primefac (talk) 22:03, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Grupo Garza Ponce

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Unreferenced, there are some dependable sources out there, but they only seem to mention this subject in passing. Drewmutt ( ^ᴥ^ ) talk  02:02, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Construction-related deletion discussions. --Cameron11598 (Talk) 04:40, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. --Cameron11598 (Talk) 04:40, 5 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Deleteas it stands — entirely unsourced article with no assertion of notability. The failure to turn up good sources immediately in English may well be systemic bias, so we shouldn't prejudice against re-creation if good sources can be found. There are a number of Google News hits from Google.mx but on first read they strike me as routine business coverage.  A  Train talk 15:52, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep for now, per 's new sources below and pending article improvement. Even if those don't pan out we can always re-nominate the article later.  A  Train talk 15:35, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Mexico-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 13:55, 9 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep – Article is entirely unsourced. However, I did find significant coverage/mentions in various sources:            Most of them talk about projects this company is involved in Nuevo León. I'm not available during the week to expand this article, but I'm open to work on it. MX (  ✉  •  ✎  ) 15:20, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Ready - I believe the article is ready, . The lead still needs to be expanded, but it should pass now. I'll be adding more information in the article, and then I'll get to the intro. I don't want to give undue weight to certain events that don't need to be in the lead. Cheers, MX ( ✉  •  ✎  ) 13:56, 10 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep/close - Hi and, can we close this nomination? I'm done expanding the article, and I think it is ready now. I've nominated it to DYK too, but the nomination cannot progress unless this AfD nomination is settled. MX (  ✉  •  ✎  ) 21:51, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Wow, impressive work, yep, I'm mollified. Glad to see AfD actually serve it's purpose. Drewmutt ( ^ᴥ^ ) talk  21:56, 11 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Withdrawn (not emotionally) Due to the impressive work by for rescuing this pup. Drewmutt ( ^ᴥ^ )  talk  22:02, 11 October 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.