Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Projects and Development India Limited Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Projects_and_Development_India_Limited

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. v/r - TP 00:25, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Projects and Development India Limited (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Unreferenced. No assertion of notability. The article was (still is) mostly a copy/paste from the company's own website. Biker Biker (talk) 10:43, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.

• Delete and perhaps speedy delete as copyright violation. They edited out some of the peacock's crowing from the official website text, but apart from that the text seems the same. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 14:38, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I stubbed the article due to copyvio issues and added in some reliable sources. This is a major player in the chemical industry in India. Qrsdogg (talk) 21:22, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep A notable company.Shyamsunder (talk) 11:36, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, T. Canens (talk) 15:41, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Keep sources are not enough as per guidelines WP:CORP but the organization’s longevity, size of membership, major achievements, prominent scandals, or other factors specific to the organization should be considered as per guidelines to keep it in wikipedia. In whole article must be edited and need independent sources.Sehmeet singh (talk) 16:48, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Keep as per Sehmeet singh. Stuartyeates (talk) 03:08, 24 July 2011 (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.