Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/M3M India


 * 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.  Sandstein  08:57, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

M3M India

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Veryminor company. The US award mentioned is the "Best Upscale Golfing Life Style Residences in India" which is the sort of over-specific award that does not show notability. The Times of India article is essentially a press release, and shows the frequent uselessness of that publication for determining notability  DGG ( talk ) 19:31, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete at best as none of this suggests a better notable article. SwisterTwister   talk  20:08, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  20:08, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  20:08, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  20:08, 9 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep. Per me sheer the financial size of the company makes it notable.   Mr RD     08:55, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
 * That is not a valid argment per WP:ORGSIG. Notability depends purely on quality/depth of coverage; notability is not inherited via sales figures or whatever. Not to mention, there is no sourcing in the article to establish their market value, sales or net that could be used to evaluate such a claim, even if it were valid. – Brianhe (talk) 08:49, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete the awards are non-notable and/or regional, and can be ignored per DGG's comment above. This leaves routine coverage of unremarkable real estate transactions, not the foundation for a WP article. - Brianhe (talk) 02:15, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 02:17, 17 February 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — UY Scuti Talk  16:48, 24 February 2016 (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.