Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bovis Lend Lease

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 Speedy keep. Notability exists. SynergeticMaggot (talk) 04:44, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Bovis Lend Lease

Bovis Lend Lease (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

Non-notable company, no claim of notability, and yet my speedy tag was removed. The maintenance tag has been on it for a week. Corvus cornix_talk 03:16, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

• Keep. The company is huge, and the article already had two good references. I added two more. --Eastmain (talk) 03:27, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. —Eastmain (talk) 03:27, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. —Eastmain (talk) 03:27, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. —Eastmain (talk) 03:27, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
• Keep WP:SNOWBALL Nick Connolly (talk) 03:39, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
• Keep per sources added, seems to be fairly notable. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 03:46, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
• Keep the Infobox says it all. But if not Googles (although article traffic is surprisingly low)-- BpEps - t@lk 04:04, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
• Keep and perhaps a Speedy Keep Large multi-national company that is clearly notable. AUD12 billion in revenue should be sufficient to estabilsh notability. The deletion process is not a substitute for cleanup. -- Mattinbgn\^talk 04:09, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

• and of course there is also this fairly notable event -- Mattinbgn\^talk 04:13, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

• Speedy keep. AfD is not forced cleanup; subject is clearly notable. Celarnor ^{Talk to me} 04:09, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
• Keep - AUD12 billion in revenue with a reference to substantiate the claim should be sufficient to establish notability.--Matilda ^talk 04:19, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

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.