Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of conglomerates in Maharashtra

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. Consensus has shifted to delete with new arguments. Tone 18:10, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

List of conglomerates in Maharashtra (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Not a notable topic, doesn't meet WP:LISTN or WP:GNG. Has been in CAT:NN for over 3 years. Boleyn (talk) 18:18, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:33, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:33, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• KEEP Aids in navigation, plenty of blue links there, so its a valid list article. Dream Focus 19:46, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep. There's a lot of original research in there. The list needs to be cleaned up so it only contains links, no ranking of any sort. Ajf773 (talk) 20:07, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Lot of research here, and probably needs updating. Whiteguru (talk) 12:16, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep passes LISTN provides information and navigation for the users. Wm335td (talk) 19:26, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Meets WP:GNG and WP:LISTN. Azuredivay (talk) 05:51, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, Article fails by its own premise and horribly misguides readers. A "conglomerate" is, apologies for appearing to insult all of you, is a group or collection of companies or firms. Almost all the entries are just companies, and, so, don't belong here. "Conglomerates" - which take a lifetime to build - in Maharashtra can be counted on two hands (Reliance, Larsen and Toubro, Tata etc.). For example: If it's listing Tata Group, which is a conglomerate, why is it also listing other Tata companies? Defeats the point of the article. All the rest are subsidiaries or standalone companies. Not well-researched at all and, most importantly, gives a false idea of the situation. If you cut everything out, only a handful will be left, which does not deserve an article. And if it is renamed "List of companies in Maharasthra", then what's the point as we already have Category:Companies based in Maharashtra. This list is plain wrong, unsourced, unwarranted, un-factual and un-needed. Best, MaysinFourty (talk) 07:59, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Non-notable and seriously out-of-date. The figures aren't dated marked with dates, but they haven't been updated in over 9 years! The citations are over 10 years old (2010-11-15), older even than the figures; the figures were updated at some point long after the citations were put in place. There are only about a dozen citations for a list of several dozen companies. Sadly useless, this WP:LISTCRUFT needs to be deleted. Normal Op (talk) 19:18, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as per the excellent reasoning from the two delete comments above mine Spiderone 14:48, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per the reasons nom, Normal Op and MaysinFourty provided above.   // Timothy :: talk  04:31, 4 September 2020 (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.