Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oxagon


 * 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 merge‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__ to Neom. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 23:02, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Oxagon

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

This is the fourth of four articles about parts of NEOM, a grandiose Saudi commercial, industrial, and recreational development: This article is about a floating industrial complex on the Saudi shore of the Red Sea. However, the article does not speak for itself and does not provide any indication that the complex, which is still under construction is notable, because they do not describe what third parties have said. A review of the references was needed. None of the references are independent; they are in the nature of press releases:
 * Utamo
 * Leyja
 * Trojena
 * Oxagon


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business and Saudi Arabia.

Robert McClenon (talk) 21:06, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:54, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Suitskvarts (talk) 14:58, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Relisting comment: Relisting to get more opinions. It would be useful to see what the nominator thinks of ATD mentioned in the discussion. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:02, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Merge into Neom. Although there is a bunch of third-party sites covering the topic, a good portion appear to be glorified press releases which don't say much of substance apart from "this stage of construction is progressing" or "here is the PR release for what this district will have". Almost all of them seem to discuss it as part of the wider Neom project rather than anything significant about it. At this juncture, it doesn't justify a standalone article in my opinion. ― novov (t   c)  03:49, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * If this is not kept as a separate article it should certainly be merged/redirected to Neom. There are many independent reliable sources found by this search. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:02, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Travel and tourism-related deletion discussions. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:40, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Merge a NPOV version of properly sourced material from all four sub articles into NEOM. These are unneeded CFORKs, a single article is much better than 5 fragments at this point. If in the future there is soucing to support a SUMMARYSTYLE split, the history will be preserved.  // Timothy :: talk  06:43, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Merge then instead of draftifying (let me change my opinion). Suitskvarts (talk) 16:55, 12 January 2024 (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.