Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ronly


 * 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. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 04:10, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Ronly

 * – ( View AfD View log )

There has been a request from Ronly Holdings Ltd. to delete this page as it was not created with its authorisation, and "we feel we do not require or want a wiki page". Request is at 5671391 for users with access. I am completing the nomination on their behalf and am currently neutral. Stifle (talk) 09:59, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Their notability isn't the strongest case (and the article lacks any WP:RS verification), and per their request. Dennis Brown (talk) 18:47, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:46, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   19:54, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete, weakly. I am actually finding a fair number of reliable sources discussing this business when the name is changed to "Ronly Holdings", apparently the full form, and this strips out all the misfires on "only" typos.   The sources reveal that this business was apparently was used to funnel money to Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq, in possible violation of international sanctions. . It would appear that this business has in fact taken one of the obvious paths for a business to become worthy of encyclopedic memory; it's been implicated in a scandal with historic dimensions.  The instant article tells us nothing about that, and is a brief promotional stub with the usual vague hogwash about being a "global company".  They do appear to get around. Still, I'm not entirely sure that the subject meets WP:PERP or doesn't fail WP:ONEEVENT. Assuming that their activities were illegal or controversial, money laundering is a fairly routine practice with an obvious motive, and may not be enough to give this business lasting historical significance.  The request for deletion would appear to be somewhat disingenuous, though. This one has a better claim to notability than most, and I'm only choosing delete because I consistently set a high bar for businesses generally. If kept, the article should be rewritten to reflect the actual cause of its notability and what the sources say.  - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:47, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Delete This is probably a borderline case of notability, so if the subject objects to having an article on them, I'd be inclined to acquiesce. Peacock (talk) 22:42, 26 April 2011 (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.