Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hines Interests Limited Partnership


 * 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) — ΛΧΣ  21™  00:24, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Hines Interests Limited Partnership

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Real estate firm but no real evidence of notability offered. &mdash; RHaworth (talk · contribs) 18:48, 20 October 2012 (UTC) &mdash; RHaworth (talk · contribs) 18:48, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
 * keep: not notable? its a nearly 60 year-old company that owns and/or manages some of the most prime properties worth many billions in most of the world's largest and expensive cities. --emerson7 19:19, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
 * just so that it's clear, i think the nomination is wholly without merit on all counts. --emerson7 18:26, 28 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment. The subject is quite possibly notable, but no sources have been provided so far except for the firm's own web site and a directory entry. Better sources are needed. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 20:48, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment - did anybody (specifically the nominator) make a good faith effort to locate sources? We judge the topic, not the article, which as why it is required to seek out sources before nominating (see WP:DEL-REASON, bullet #7). Aboutmovies (talk) 07:30, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:01, 22 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, WikiPuppies  bark dig 16:29, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 16:59, 4 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep: The references seem correct and the company seems notable according to WP:N. Vacation9 (talk) 18:02, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep For a company of that size and history an immense number of additional wp:notability-suitable sources inevitably exist. I can't imagine not covering it in Wikipedia. North8000 (talk) 19:46, 4 November 2012 (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.