Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/McEwen Mining


 * 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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 22:27, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

McEwen Mining

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No indications of notability, all sources present are primary, and a lot of information seems invalid as well; should be deleted or, if kept, rewritten from ground up by someone familiar to the company or at least the respective WikiProject. Lordtobi ( &#9993; ) 17:41, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:43, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:43, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:44, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete Fails WP:CORPDEPTH and GNG. -- HighKing ++ 19:39, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —MRD2014 talk contribs 00:24, 12 June 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  So Why  06:35, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete – As stated, notability has not been established, and all but one of its citations point to the company's own site. V2Blast (talk) 08:38, 20 June 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.