Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Occidental Hotels and Resorts


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 23:37, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Occidental Hotels and Resorts

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Page was tagged for speedy deletion (G11) twice and declined twice, once by me after being convinced otherwise about it and doing some editing to remove promotional language. The subject still does not appear to pass WP:GNG though. §everal⇒|Times 02:13, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- Cheers,  Riley   Huntley  02:20, 15 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete as one of the people who tried to speedy it. Once you remove the advertising, the press releases, and the unsourced info, there's nothing left. Dori ☾Talk ☯ Contribs☽ 03:22, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. See this Google News search. Perhaps someone with Highbeam access could find additional references. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 03:55, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Cheers, Riley   Huntley  01:31, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

 Hello, I am the person who created this article. I've gone through the process of editing and adding sources and believe the article to be impartial. I'd appreciated it if the tags be removed. After having compared and contrasted the page I created and other hotels' Wikipedia pages, I don't see a difference content-wise nor see the content I created as commercial. Please advise.--Kris.sordo (talk) 16:37, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Spain-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:47, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:47, 22 November 2012 (UTC)


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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, KTC (talk) 00:05, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

 I move that the article for deletion tag be removed from this entry, as no one has given just cause for its removal, and this issue has been outstanding for several weeks.--Kris.sordo (talk) 16:40, 3 December 2012 (UTC) In that case, I'd appreciate your input on how I can further improve it so we can move to removing the tag. Thanks.--Kris.sordo (talk) 15:59, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I gave just cause for its deletion - I did not think that it was sufficiently notable to pass the general notability guideline. The page does look better now but I believe there are still notability issues. If we have no consensus then that's just the way it goes, but please don't interpret that result as indicating that deletion is not an option. §everal⇒|Times 16:59, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I've no idea. I looked through the first five pages of the Google News results; I don't think I would say there's significant coverage, at least not in English. The best article I found was this. Eh. I'd wager towards delete but that's mostly because I feel that Wikipedia doesn't need to write about companies just for existing and operating. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 17:32, 7 December 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.