Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/OPIN

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 no consensus. WP:NPASR Mark Arsten (talk) 22:08, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OPIN

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

This article was created by the sockmaster User:Edson Rosa. They have created many non-notable companies. This article has no sources establishing notability and I could find no substantial coverage establishing notability. I recognize that language could be an issue in establishing notability, so if this company is regionally, perhaps someone can find an independent reliable source. I am One of Many (talk) 18:08, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 19:31, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 19:31, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I looked it up, it's a NN subsidiary of ONEXIM, which doesn't have an article of its own either - instead it is covered in Mikhail Prokhorov, who controls it ultimately. This can be a cheap redirect to Mikhail Prokhorov after deletion. -- Y not? 21:31, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dusti^{*Let's talk!*} 23:53, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep HIghly notable and very substantially ccovered in reliable independent sources. " It was the first Russian real estate developer to list its shares in Russia. " As noted above a merge to ONEXIM (which doesn't yet exist) is worth considering. Links to highly notable Mikhail Prokhorov should also be noted in article. Candleabracadabra (talk) 01:53, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jujutacular (talk) 13:13, 6 September 2013 (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.