Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Filinvest Land, Inc.

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 Filinvest Development Corporation. czar ⨹ 22:53, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Filinvest Land, Inc.[edit]

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

Obscure company, no notoriety, content created by two users one of whose user name is actually "Filinvest" — only 3 non-list pages link here, 2 of which should probably also be deleted. CircleAdrian (talk) 22:37, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Also, parent company doesn't even have a page. CircleAdrian (talk) 22:40, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Also also, text on the page is copied verbatim from company's website. CircleAdrian (talk) 22:45, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:55, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:56, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, or at least merge to ~~a Filinvest article~~ Filinvest Development Corporation - The company is no means "obscure": Filinvest is one of the largest companies in the Philippines, particularly in real-estate. Also, I wonder if the nominator even bothered checking for sources: a simple search results in several hits for the parent company. Granted, many of these are routine coverage, but the sheer volume of hits suggests notability at least for the parent company. ~~If anything, I'm surprised Filinvest doesn't have an article at all, given how long it's been active and that it has many, many projects and investments.~~ Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 08:53, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Per the comment below, I'm supporting a merge to the newly-created article mentioned. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 10:10, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I would support merging the article to a Filinvest article — that's part of why I thought this article was problematic, though, was that there was an article for this relatively insignificant subsidiary & not for the much larger parent company. (And yes, I checked for sources — same issue.) CircleAdrian (talk) 09:07, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- FWIW, I thought "Filinvest Land" was "Filinvest" all along. It is the most prominent subsidiary, if they even had other subsidiaries of note. –H T D 20:16, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 00:04, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – I have created a new Filinvest Development Corporation article. NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:47, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 05:01, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into the parent company's page and remove copy-pasted material from the source page. Jcmcc450 (talk) 19:37, 11 March 2015 (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.