Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RSM Chio Lim Stone Forest
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 keep. henrik•talk 18:37, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
RSM Chio Lim Stone Forest[edit]
- RSM Chio Lim Stone Forest (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Delete fails WP:CORP. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 07:05, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment based on GNews searches [1][2], I see a couple of articles from the International Accounting Bulletin which cover the firm [3][4]. For some reason I can't log into AccessMyLibrary.com from so I'll take a look later. cab (talk) 08:41, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Singapore-related deletion discussions. cab (talk) 08:41, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per CaliforniaAliBaba's research. Bearian (talk) 21:22, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete no independent reliable sources (there's one reference in the article, but it doesn't seem to support what it's supposed to, plus it's not independent of the subject). Matchups (talk) 12:45, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak keep. It's true that the one reference is not independent, given that "Contact Us" at the bottom leads to the company itself, but the news search done by cab seems to confirm that the business is notable enough at least to be quoted in news articles, as here and here. (I'd incorporate those in the article if I could figure out how.) Not at all likely to be disinterested, IBM profiles them as a customer here. The company sponsors scholarships, I see. In the alternative to deletion, if the article is not kept, I believe it should either be merged or at least redirected to RSM International. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:12, 29 February 2008 (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.