Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Standard Chartered Bank Nepal


 * 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. (non-admin closure) 🌀 Locomotive207 - talk  🌀  01:26, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Standard Chartered Bank Nepal

 * – ( View AfD View log )

WP:ORG Notability notice on page for 10 years without improvement. No significant secondary sources. rsjaffe talk  01:46, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions.   rsjaffe  talk  01:46, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nepal-related deletion discussions.   rsjaffe  talk  01:46, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:04, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Previously nominated via WP:PROD, ineligible for soft deletion.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  03:51, 27 August 2021 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Redirect to Standard Chartered as WP:CHEAP.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 20:45, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep because it has WP:SIGCOV in newspaper and academia. nirmal (talk) 08:26, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep On the national/only stock exchange, fifth oldest class 'A' bank, one of only 27 such banks in the country, AAA rating. In addition to those in the article now, there's some reputable coverage online, and comes up in discourses like this one. There's enough coverage is non-reputable online sources. This from the rating agency that gave the AAA rating is SIGCOV and should count for GNG. And that's just in English. Considering the fact that all the traditional newspapers do have business pages where I don't see why they'd religiously avoid ever writing about this bank in its 35-year history, I !vote keep per WP:NEXIST. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 14:45, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Curbon7 (talk) 04:33, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep, has received plenty of coverage, and is a major bank in the country.Jackattack1597 (talk) 00:21, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. Passes WP:GNG per sources above and in the article.4meter4 (talk) 00:29, 12 September 2021 (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.