Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Versobank SA

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. Article recreation may be pursued if better sources are found. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 05:55, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Versobank SA[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG; zero independent sources. Unfortunately this AfD is required because PROD was rejected by creator of article without any substantial improvement. Brianhe (talk) 10:21, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Brianhe (talk) 10:24, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

delete as it stands - this is completely unreferenced. Google in English finds very little; GNews throws up hits in Romanian, though I can't tell if they're substantive or passing mentions - David Gerard (talk) 13:25, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - seems to be a lot of mentions in non-english sources, and even english ones[1]. No comment yet on keep/delete until finished reviewing sources... Also of interest is the Estonian Wikipedia version of et:Versobank AS (view auto-translated version[2]) -- 1Wiki8........................... (talk) 19:45, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know if the et.wiki article is of any help establishing GNG: it contains four cites to the parent company of the subject, and three to a single local publication. Brianhe (talk) 16:05, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, non-en wikipedia's usually have a much lower bar for notability. They can be useful sometimes to give hints on where to search for possible significant coverage. -- 1Wiki8........................... (talk) 21:21, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - fails WP:CORPDEPTH - it's part of a WALLEDGARDEN of stuff related to Cyprus. MSJapan (talk) 02:41, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:PROMO and lack of RS. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:33, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Estonia-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:33, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The references I see unfortunately have to be discounted per WP:ILLCON. Beyond that, I don't see any other references to satisfy WP:CORPDEPTH. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 06:09, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:ILLCON as noted above. Currently not finding enough mentions to support WP:CORP. No prejudice to re-creation if better sources are found. -- 1Wiki8........................... (talk) 07:11, 26 September 2016 (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.