Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deutsche Gulf Finance

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Sarahj2107 (talk) 07:53, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deutsche Gulf Finance[edit]

Deutsche Gulf Finance (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I would've PRODed too, my searches are finding several links, including some about the actual Deutsche Bank itself and not this 2010-start company, but all that I've found of this specific bank is nothing convincing for better notability. You'll notice this article's history is also troubled therefore notifying past user and tagger AllyD. SwisterTwister talk 00:24, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: I have added another reference to support part of the article text, and I did find mention of one other award (TradeArabia (2011)  – via HighBeam (subscription required) ), though too trivial for the article itself, but this amounts only to evidence that this joint-venture exists and not evidence of its encyclopaedic notability. AllyD (talk) 11:54, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JbhTalk 14:49, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:28, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:28, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Saudi Arabia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:28, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - not enough in-depth coverage. Tom29739 [talk] 19:39, 7 June 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.