Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kish Khodro


 * 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) czar ♔   01:00, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Kish Khodro

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article, believe it or not, has been around since 2006. I declined a speedy delete on the article (A7), although I'm not sure why. I could see the article had been vandalized. Perhaps that influenced me. It had zero sources, but with some difficulty, I managed to find the company's website. The template says the company doesn't exist anymore, which is why I used the past tense in the first sentence (I did some copy editing, too), but I'm not sure that's true. There isn't much out there on the article, but because it's Iranian, it's possible I just can't find it. So, I leave it to the community. Bbb23 (talk) 01:56, 29 July 2014 (UTC)


 * This article is historically accurate. Although the company may not exist anymore the claims in the article are authentic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.172.172.104 (talk) 02:51, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:28, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:28, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:28, 29 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment. I found these: Indian Express, MEED, Pakistand and Gulf Economist. I would guess that there is Iranian coverage out there although it may be hard to find outside Iran. --Michig (talk) 06:57, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Rcsprinter123    (deliver)  @ 09:28, 5 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Oppose: Article needs work, but is of interest and note as a car company from a country that is not well known for car production. Warren (talk) 16:24, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I very much appreciate the work that's been done to improve the article. I really don't care what the outcome is of the nomination as I figure it's a win-win situation. I do have one question for those who have now looked more closely at the company. Is the company still operating or is it, as was originally claimed, defunct? It'd be good to get that rather basic question right.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:20, 6 August 2014 (UTC)


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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 06:04, 13 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Oppose: article is now in decent shape after Warren's great edits. OSX (talk • contributions) 02:57, 16 August 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.