This is an old revision of this page, as edited by PD Slessor (talk | contribs) at 23:53, 3 January 2024 (→Century Financial Consultancy: Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 23:53, 3 January 2024 by PD Slessor (talk | contribs) (→Century Financial Consultancy: Reply)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Century Financial Consultancy
New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- How to contribute
- Introduction to deletion process
- Guide to deletion (glossary)
- Help, my article got nominated for deletion!
- Century Financial Consultancy (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
The history here is a little complex. A previous version, at Century Financial, was deleted after Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Century Financial. Liz closed that AfD rightly, but after she did, we found that User:Antonio Vinzaretti wasn't in good faith, which puts its conclusion in a bit of doubt. Then the article was re-created at Century Financial Consultancy and immediately draftified by BoroVoro. Then it was re-created again and speedily deleted by Kuru under WP:G11 (or alternatively WP:G4 although this second ground isn't in the logs).
The creator complained about these actions at Misplaced Pages:Deletion review/Log/2023 December 19. Deletion review concluded that the speedy deletions didn't meet the letter of either WP:G4 or WP:G11. DRV interprets speedy deletion criteria narrowly and restores if there's doubt.
But there's clearly an appetite among independent reviewers to delete this content. Kuru described it as SEO material with fake sources that failed validation. Several users at the deletion review didn't feel that this content belongs in mainspace, and I rather agree with them. I think we need to have a proper AfD that seriously examines these sources and is conducted without the socking that tainted the previous one. —S Marshall T/C 18:44, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. —S Marshall T/C 18:44, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance and United Arab Emirates. Spiderone 20:04, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
- Delete: In addition to the content of both versions being WP:PROMOTIONAL in nature, the only sources with nontrivial coverage, Gulf News and Khaleej Times, offer branded/partner content services, and aren't suitable for establishing facts and notability: https://www.khaleejtimes.com/advertise, http://reachbygn.com/. PaulT2022 (talk) 05:13, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
- Sir here are some sources not from gulf news and khaleej
- https://www.thestatesman.com/india/dubai-based-companies-invest-hospitality-tourism-health-sectors-jk-1503037147.html
- https://www.thenews.com.pk/amp/985638-bal-krishen-rathore-indian-expat-who-turned-from-tea-boy-to-ceo-in-no-time
- https://www.arabianbusiness.com/industries/banking-finance/uaes-oldest-investment-services-firm-acquires-new-category-1-license
- https://www.thenationalnews.com/uae/2022/05/20/these-uae-companies-have-happiest-employees-according-to-survey-on-morale/ (Francisjk2020 (talk) 13:29, 30 December 2023 (UTC))
- Speedy Delete he article on Century Financial Consultancy lacks independent reliable sources to establish notability as per WP:ORG. References provided seem like sponsored content (Gulf, Khaleej), The article's promotional tone violates also clearly violates Misplaced Pages's neutral point of view policy WP:NPOV. As for the creator BoroVoro, looking through his history is alarming. He drafties quite frequently, often before he's supposed to it seems, and it appears to be quite a red flag. It seems like this company page is tangled up with sock-puppetry, UPE, and intentional edits of bad faith. No accusations (I will assume good faith), but very strange all of this. Also ref-bombing. All of this screams red flag.
- PD Slessor (talk) 23:53, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
Recent achievements Century financial was voted as the best workplace to work in the UAE and the best workplace for women https://www.khaleejtimes.com/kt-network/century-financial-tops-the-best-workplaces-for-women-in-the-gcc
Also they made an investment of 100 million dollars into the Indian state of Jammu & Kashmir. https://awaamkibaat.jk.gov.in/jk-govt-signs-mou-with-century-financial-for-100-million-investment-in-jammu-kashmir/ (Francisjk2020 (talk) 08:17, 30 December 2023 (UTC))
Here are some sources I could find, I am not too good at selecting which ones are notable
https://www.khaleejtimes.com/kt-network/century-financial-wins-big-again
https://gulfnews.com/amp/business/corporate-news/uae-based-financial-sector-reaffirms-its-commitment-to-spearhead-sustainability-goals-ahead-of-cop28-1.1679900257627 (Francisjk2020 (talk) 08:31, 30 December 2023 (UTC))
- WP:ORGCRIT is useful in understanding what sources should be used in articles about organisations.
- I'd like like to note that my 'delete' opinion is based on WP:TNT and Misplaced Pages:Verifiability considerations: there's evidence of presented publications offering sponsored publications in their media kits and I couldn't find other English-language significant coverage, but I found that company's spokespeople are being routinely interviewed by Bloomberg on UAE-related matters (search for '"century financial" uae' in Wikimedia Library), so couldn't form a definite opinion whether it's notable or not. What's certain though, is that the sources used in both versions of the article (Century Financial and the one being currently discussed) are mostly inappropriate, as they're neither reliable for verification or helpful to establish Misplaced Pages:Notability, and the promotional thrust of both articles is unsuitable. PaulT2022 (talk) 18:31, 30 December 2023 (UTC)