Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deutsche Babcock Al Jaber

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 delete and redirect to Bilfinger. Randykitty (talk) 10:59, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Deutsche Babcock Al Jaber

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

Subject appears to fail WP:CORP. All provided sources seem to be either primary, or fail WP:RS. A search of Google news brought up exactly one source, in German. Subject is not notable. Kindzmarauli (talk) 22:08, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I found this, in the NY Times, but that's the only thing. It indicates something about the company's size, but I do not see the coverage to satisfy the GNG. Drmies (talk) 02:51, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - If the article is deleted, can the closing admin please also delete the non-free logo [1]. Kindzmarauli (talk) 22:08, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the reminder. When an article's deleted, its nonfree image(s) can be deleted under G8, dependent on a deleted page (assuming that they're not used elsewhere), since being orphaned this way this isn't the same as being orphaned by removal from an existing article. Nyttend (talk) 23:24, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:10, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Middle East-related deletion discussions. NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:10, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:47, 29 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:44, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect: to Bilfinger, there is no doubt as to the notability of the corporate parent. There are other articles for subsidiaries that could be rolled up as well, they seem to want to get the whole corporate tree into WP. Vrac (talk) 12:41, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. WP:ADMASQ puffery jargon: "DEBAJ maintained and developed successfully its active role..." Blah. Pax 06:32, 13 February 2015 (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.