Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Planters Development Bank
: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) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 00:02, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
=[[Planters Development Bank]]=
:{{la|Planters Development Bank}} – (
:({{Find sources|Planters Development Bank}})
No indication of notability. Nothing has been done to improve its references since prodding. Raykyogrou0 (Talk) 10:32, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep. The bank has significant coverage in reliable sources (see [http://services.inquirer.net/search/?cx=partner-pub-1605567560733750%3Asv9uao60u5g&cof=FORID%3A10&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=planters+bank], for example), and as mentioned in previous AfDs about Philippine banks, I'd actually like to see the nominator put the effort to improve the article in question (since he/she is so concerned about referencing and sources) rather than just go around nominating articles willy-nilly for deletion. --Sky Harbor (talk) 10:58, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
- It would be nice if any of the articles you created years ago actually had some sources added to them. The concern about referencing and sources is that there are no sources on the page which would establish this bank's notability. Raykyogrou0 (Talk) 10:59, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- Speedy close. WP:COMPANY states that "Editors coming across an article on such a company without such references are encouraged to search (or request that others search) prior to nominating for deletion, given the very high likelihood that a publicly traded company is actually notable according to the primary criterion." It appears this was not met, if that has been done, they a 2nd nomination may be pursued. –HTD 12:07, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
- sigh. Is it notable though? Is it really?Raykyogrou0 (Talk) 10:59, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- Close/Keep AFD isn't used as a clean up, Also per HTD. -→Davey2010→→Talk to me!→ 18:49, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
- This is a matter of notability, not cleanup. Raykyogrou0 (Talk) 10:59, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:28, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:28, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
- Comment. The comments saying "Speedy keep" or "close" are not actual speedy keep criterion. Raykyogrou0 (Talk) 06:05, 17 January 2014 (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.