Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PrivatBank (Latvia)

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 no consensus. Merge can be discussed outside of AfD. Consensus to delete is unlikely at this point. (non-admin closure) b uidhe 06:16, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

PrivatBank (Latvia)

[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)

No evidence this small bank passes WP:NCOMPANY/GNG. Recent sources don't help much, all coverage I am seeing is from press releases, their rewrites, and yellow page-like catalogues. WP:NOTYELLOWPAGES. PS. This was redirected to PrivatBank, but the redirect was challenged and the stub restored, so we are here. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 12:34, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 12:34, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:56, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Latvia-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:56, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to PrivatBank. There is some brief coverage by Reuters ([1], [2]) that is probably noteworthy but not enough for a standalone article. --MarioGom (talk) 09:17, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Another WP:POINTy AfD after a PROD is shot down. Nominator even removed part of the sourced information provided, clearly mixing up bank (Latvian) with the shareholder (Ukranian). The source clearly stated "the Italian branch of Latvian lender AS PrivatBank ". The German article provides enough info to improve the article but I guess the nominator did his WP:BEFORE that well that he overlooked the interwikis. The Banner talk 23:37, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- The German version is not better referenced. WP:NOTYELLOWPAGES. One or two minor scandals are not sufficient for an article to be kept. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:51, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - A minor scandal? With the Italian Central Bank actually closing a bank? The Banner talk 18:20, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Per available sources. If needed, please use "merge to" to discuss a possible merger. gidonb (talk) 00:33, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, dibbydib Ping me!^💬/_✏ 22:29, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to PrivatBank. There is not enough for an article on this specific bank, but it is appropriate to merge. Naomi.piquette (talk) 15:53, 17 March 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.