Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sino-Ocean Land

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. Fram (talk) 13:55, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sino-Ocean Land

Sino-Ocean Land (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Delete or Merge with COSCO. At least doesn't have notability to be a standalone article. Moreover, it is written in an advertising tone. -- Niaz^{(Talk • Contribs)} 14:34, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

• Keep or merge, but don't delete as passes WP:V with sources such as [1] and [2].--h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 15:25, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

I do agree that it passes verifiability. But still lacks in notability to have a standalone article. -- Niaz^{(Talk • Contribs)} 15:28, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

• Keep. I think that being "one of the largest real estate companies in Beijing" makes it notable. I added a reference. --Eastmain (talk) 17:33, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. —Eastmain (talk) 17:37, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. —Eastmain (talk) 17:37, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

• Keep, it's verifiable and notable as a subsidiary which is allowed an article of its own, especially considering its business focus is very different from its parent company. Snake66 (talk) 16:59, 2 February 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.