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 Keep. Nomination withdrawn and no !votes for deletion or merger. (non-admin close) Abecedare (talk) 02:16, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Global Adjustments (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

*Delete, Spamlike Hell in a Bucket (talk) 02:57, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Article has underwent some improvement and I've recieved counsel on this from seperate parties whichmakes me inclined to switch to Keep. I would suggest with 3 or more keep votes that this discussion be closed citing WP:snowHell in a Bucket (talk) 17:58, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong Keep. Spamlike is not a rationale for AfD, it's something for WP:CLEANUP, if the subject is notable (which the nomination doesn't question). Although the nomination doesn't question notability, I'll still address that: Rediff.com 2006, The Hindu 2008, Hindu Business Line 2007, BusinessWeek 2008, The Hindu 2005, Business Standard 2009, Telegraph UK, The Economic Times 2009, Kuwait Times 2008, LiveMint-WSJ India. I'm going to find some articles to delete now. -SpacemanSpiff (talk) 04:13, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. —SpacemanSpiff (talk) 04:50, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong keep - nominator clearly failed to practice WP:BEFORE as this isn't even close: [1] --ThaddeusB (talk) 17:04, 12 June 2009 (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.