Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PropertyLimBrothers


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. ✗ plicit  11:33, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

PropertyLimBrothers

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

While I don't quite think the text meets the criteria of a G11 like, I do believe it is in no way suitable for retention in mainspace. Perhaps I should have nominated it immediately instead of draftifying. In any case, that's now moot due to the cut & paste move back. I cannot find any sources meeting WP:ORGDEPTH or WP:ORGIND. Alpha3031 (t • c) 11:29, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Singapore. Alpha3031 (t • c) 11:29, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete: I would say that this new article is borderline G11 (The one I CSD'd was by another different editor, something strange with different people suddenly wanting this particular firms article published) Josey Wales Parley 18:04, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete Does not meet WP:ORGIND, looks like an advertisement. Dcotos  ( talk ) 08:10, 8 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Keep I think subject passes WP:ORGCRITE based on factual articles from reliable sources. MeltPees (talk) 15:49, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete not notable; routine news articles (possibly SE0-crated or just paid). --BoraVoro (talk) 07:34, 14 May 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.