Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nambiar Builders

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:19, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nambiar Builders

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NCORP Polygnotus (talk) 12:31, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Response The subject of this article meets the **General Notability Guideline (WP:GNG)** and **Notability for Companies (WP:NCORP)** based on multiple independent, reliable sources. The following references provide significant coverage beyond trivial mentions:
1. [It’s raining deals at the Great Times Property Festival](https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/its-raining-deals-at-the-great-times-property-festival/articleshow/74076948.cms) – The Times of India

2. [Enphase India and U-Solar install rooftop PV plants in Bengaluru](https://www.energetica-india.net/news/enphase-india-and-u-solar-install-rooftop-pv-plants-in-bengaluru) – Energetica India

3. [Koramangala-based web start-up HomeBuy360 hits home run in real estate](https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/south/koramangala-based-web-start-up-homebuy360-com-hits-home-run-in-real-estate/articleshow/13642201.cms?from=mdr) – The Economic Times

4. [Six reasons why you should watch 'Khasaakinte Itihaasam' play in Bengaluru](https://www.thenewsminute.com/features/six-reasons-why-you-should-watch-khasaakinte-itihaasam-play-bengaluru-42360) – The News Minute

5. [Enphase looks to tap 10% of rooftop market in next 2 years](https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/tech/technology/enphase-looks-to-tap-10-of-rooftop-market-in-next-2-years/articleshow/89906198.cms?from=mdr) – The Economic Times

These sources demonstrate significant independent coverage, meeting the requirements of **WP:GNG** by showing that the subject has received attention from reputable publications. Additionally, since the article is about a business, it aligns with **WP:NCORP** by having multiple third-party sources, not limited to press releases or company announcements.
I believe the article merits retention based on these references and respectfully request that it not be deleted. Sanyam (talk) 13:21, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have reformatted the above reply a bit to make further discussion easier. Skynxnex (talk) 15:39, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. Shellwood (talk) 13:21, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Karnataka-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:35, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
keep The content appears to be detailed and written in a neutral tone, aligning with Wikipedia’s guidelines for neutrality and verifiability. The article provides substantial information relevant to the topic, and there is no indication of promotional bias. Additionally, the references cited seem appropriate and support the article’s claims. Therefore, I believe the article should be retained. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FEA8:FF20:817D:C950:BE55:DCAD:14C7 (talk) 20:41, 17 October 2024 (UTC) — 2607:FEA8:FF20:817D:C950:BE55:DCAD:14C7 (talk · contribs) has only contributed to the article(s) under discussion for deletion and this XFD page. Polygnotus (talk) 04:55, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retain The article should be retained as it has received link in from prominent celebrities such as K S Chithra,Sharreth and K K Nishad.Relation to such well-known public figures demonstrate the subject’s notability and relevance. These acknowledgments also contribute to the subject's significance and public interest, aligning with Wikipedia’s notability guidelines. --Divyajain85 (talk) 16:00, 18 October 2024 (UTC) — Divyajain85 (talk · contribs) has only contributed to the article(s) under discussion for deletion and this XFD page. Polygnotus (talk) 16:36, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: !Vote by indefblocked sock struck. BD2412 T 01:46, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Doesn't pass WP:NCORP. The closer should note that the keep voters in the discussion so far (Sanyam, 2607:FEA8:FF20:817D:C950:BE55:DCAD:14C7, and Divyajain85) all appear to be SPAs. Hemiauchenia (talk) 21:15, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
keep It appears that editors Hemiauchenia and Polygnotus are primarily focused on my (Sanyam's) involvement rather than the content and significance of the page in question. I strongly disagree with their assessment regarding the article's failure to meet the criteria outlined in "WP:NCORP." The page clearly includes all important parameters such as reliable media sources and relevant linkages with notable individuals. Additionally, it is essential to recognize that multiple identities have been created online under the same name, highlighting the necessity for Wikipedia as a critical validation tool to differentiate between fake and legitimate representations.--Sanyam Jain (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 04:25, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: !Vote by sockmaster also struck. BD2412 T 01:48, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Analysis of sources proves that the page is for WP:PROMO. Poor sources on the page that fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:NCORP. None of the sources meets the criteria of WP:NCORP. Sources also fail WP:CORPDEPTH and WP:ORGIND because of no independent subject matter and it does not have any beneficial contribution and does not warrant significant notability. RangersRus (talk) 17:07, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Both The Economic Times and The News Minute are references that can be relied upon. Additionally, there are other sources that show notability. There are a variety of other references that indicate this passes WP:GNG. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Udtatika (talk • contribs) 15:45, 21 October 2024 (UTC) (This user also appears to be a SPA, see their contribs [1]. Hemiauchenia (talk) 16:50, 21 October 2024 (UTC))[reply]
- Note: !Vote by additional sock also struck. BD2412 T 01:53, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Meets WP: GNG AfD nominator seems to be unfamiliar with WP: BEFORE, so follow the sources mentioned above. Sending a new article to AfD is not the best way to go. Meraara (talk) 13:29, 23 October 2024 (UTC) — Meraara (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
- Note: !Vote by additional sock also struck. BD2412 T 01:54, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Subject does not pass WP:GNG/ WP:SIRS.

**Source assessment table:**
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://www.indywoodexcellenceawards.com/builtinindia-awards		?	Listing	✘ No
https://www.brickworkratings.com/		?	Homepage link	✘ No
https://www.icra.in/Rationale/ShowRationaleReport?Id=91186	?	?	PDF Listing	✘ No
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/its-raining-deals-at-the-great-times-property-festival/articleshow/74076948.cms		~	Trivial mention	✘ No
https://www.energetica-india.net/news/enphase-india-and-u-solar-install-rooftop-pv-plants-in-bengaluru	Interview / Press release	?		✘ No
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/south/koramangala-based-web-start-up-homebuy360-com-hits-home-run-in-real-estate/articleshow/13642201.cms?from=mdr			Trivial mention	✘ No
https://www.thenewsminute.com/features/six-reasons-why-you-should-watch-khasaakinte-itihaasam-play-bengaluru-42360		?	Trivial mention	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 10:07, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~~~~<noinclude></noinclude>

Delete. Source analysis above is persuasive. Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:02, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete agree with the source analysis, there is a real lack of significant coverage on the page (all or almost all are just passing mentions) JMWt (talk) 09:21, 25 October 2024 (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.