Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Petro Rabigh


 * 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.  Jujutacular  T · C 20:29, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Petro Rabigh

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Article does not assert why this plant is notable or significant. Sources only mention this plant in passing, and in any case, the mere existence of a power plant of all things does not merit an article. Rasputin72 (talk) 08:41, 10 January 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cirt (talk) 00:37, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. I added a reference from The New York Times. Petro Rabigh is a petrochemical plant rather than a power plant, and it is a company listed on Tadawul, the only stock exchange in Saudi Arabia. This is a huge plant which cost about $10 billion to build. - Eastmain (talk) 09:44, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Saudi Arabia-related deletion discussions.  —Eastmain (talk) 09:44, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  —Eastmain (talk) 09:44, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ( X! ·  talk )  · @092  · 01:12, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete as this article fails WP:CSD, since it makes no claim to notability in accordance with WP:CORP, nor is there any significant coverage to support such a claim. Although this company is the subject of some routine press releases, these are not evidence of notability in accordance with WP:NTEMP.--Gavin Collins (talk|contribs) 10:26, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Speedy keep. It's a freaking 400 million barrel per day oil refinery, says Google Finance, which would put it comfortably in the top 10 largest refineries in the USA if it were in the usa.   It's also a publicly traded company on the Saudi exchange.  Just the downwind stream of pollutants would make it noteworthy, let alone the sheer number of dollars of oil that go through it.  Per WP:LISTED we should expand on this before we delete; also, we need WP:PRIMARY sources from petroleum industry trade publications.  Edward Vielmetti (talk) 02:39, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep the sources are fully adequate for notability, and they were from the beginning.    DGG ( talk ) 03:31, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep "400 million barrel per day capacity refinery". Yeah, that sounds like a notable company to me.  Clicking on the Google news search, I see it mentioned plenty of times in the press, and a company wouldn't be talked about if it wasn't notable.   D r e a m Focus  13:53, 24 January 2010 (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.