Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bank of China (Canada)

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 merge to Bank of China. I see the merge-then-delete argument, but if stuff is merged WP:CWW requires that the old history be kept for attribution issues as there is a large amount of editors. Thus merge-then-redirect as with normal merges, although WP:RFD can discuss the redirect if people are so inclined. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:42, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bank of China (Canada)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Per WP:NORG, WP:Notability, and WP:Permastub, and following the lead of User:Piotrus and User:Mrschimpf, this article may not be notable or, if it is, it is either a permastub or an emerging permastub. It could easily be consolidated into Bank of China as a separate section, if it isn't already, as was done with CTBC Bank (Canada) into CTBC Bank. Doug Mehus (talk) 19:59, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:04, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:04, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:04, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Bank of China. As written, right now it fails WP:NORG. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:17, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per Piotrus FOARP (talk) 14:59, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, PhantomSteve/talk¦contribs\ 18:18, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Merge as per above and then delete this permastub as there are no indications it meets the threshold for notability in its own right. HighKing⁺⁺ 10:56, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

HighKing, By "delete this permastub," does that mean you'd like to see the redirect suppressed? If so, I'd favour that as well. I don't think we need to keep adding redirects for the sake of adding redirects.Doug Mehus (talk) 15:52, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dmehus, while redirects are cheap and easy, I only see the point if the name of this topic is likely to be a common or likely search term. In my opinion it isn't. People will search for "Bank of China" so there's no point in a redirect. HighKing⁺⁺ 16:14, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

HighKing, exactly! I'm of the same opinion. The only difference in the latter is the parenthetical qualifier, which people are unlikely to direct type into the address bar or search for. Doug Mehus (talk) 00:35, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural Note to AfD Closer: Please note HighKing's and my rationale on deleting the existing page URL if this closes as merge. Doug Mehus (talk) 00:35, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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.