Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Majid Al Futtaim Group

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 --Mdann52talk to me! 08:22, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Majid Al Futtaim Group

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

advertising. Appears to be a non-notable company, as only ref is a profile. --Mdann52talk to me! 11:06, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom BlueSalix (talk) 11:58, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please consider reading WP:PERNOM. Thank you for your consideration. Northamerica1000^(talk) 18:45, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

how rude BlueSalix (talk) 19:42, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rudeness wasn't the intention, so apologies if you were offended. Just a heads up that AfD closers may discount idem types of !votes. It's up to you to expound upon your !vote, or not. Cheers, Northamerica1000^(talk) 21:05, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Close - A company founded in 1992 employing 24,500 employees is going meet WP:GNG. A quick search New York Times The Gulf The Gulf Khaleej Times. There's thousands of other articles on the topic. -- Jreferee (talk) 12:15, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Close what Jreferee said a company with over 24,000 employees is going to meet WP:GNG.--Jeffrd10 (talk) 14:17, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - significant coverage in reliable sources determines notability, not the number of employees. However, it is more than likely that a company with a large workforce would also have received significant coverage.--ukexpat (talk) 14:47, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Arab Emirates-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:11, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:11, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as passing WP:CORPDEPTH. Source examples include: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], and more are available. Promotional tone can be addressed by copy editing. Also, per WP:NRVE, topic notability on Wikipedia is based upon the availability of sources, rather than the state of sourcing in articles. Northamerica1000^(talk) 18:41, 22 January 2014 (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.