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 (non-admin closure). Nice job on the reformatting. --Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 17:49, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of companies in the United Arab Emirates[edit]

This list appears to attract some non-notablecompanies, moreover I don't see it adding anything that Category:Companies of the United Arab Emirates doesn't already do. Deadly∀ssassin^(talk) 11:05, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. —Pixelface (talk) 16:10, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Middle East-related deletion discussions. —Pixelface (talk) 16:10, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: This list attracts a lot of spam and contains no encyclopedic content. Leitmanp (talk | contributions) 19:07, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. -- Rai-me 19:12, 9 March 2008 (UTC) Keep per reformatting. Rai-me 19:23, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. If it was a list of notable companies such as listed on a stock exchange, it would be a different matter. Keep given that it is now a list of notable UAE companies. Capitalistroadster (talk) 19:08, 13 March 2008 (UTC)Capitalistroadster (talk) 19:24, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- Russavia (talk) 23:56, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep Previously, I would have said delete, but now nothing but a strong keep, as lists such as these are very important for red-link development, particularly outside of the so-called first world they are important for fighting systematic bias. How can we use being listed on a stock exchange as a factor in inclusion, when most of the countries listed right here do not have stock exchanges. If one sees entries which are obviously 'spam'-type entries, then delete the entries, not the entire article. Also, might I add, that there is nary an article in that category which hasn't been put up at Afd, and which hasn't survived for the very same reasons I state above. I would suggest that the nominator either withdraw the nomination, or add the entire category to the Afd. --Russavia (talk) 00:05, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, perfectly consistent with the other lists in Category:Lists of companies by country. Lists and categories are not mutually exclusive. --Pixelface (talk) 16:47, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have now reformatted and referenced the list in order to make it a valuable list and development tool. --Russavia (talk) 08:23, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as now formatted. There is considerable additional information beyond what a category can do.. Probably most of the companies here without articles ought to have them. DGG (talk)
Speedy Keep, per the reformat. As said before, this is good for redlink development, and it's always better to encourage development than to let it stagnate. Celarnor (talk) 17:01, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Withdraw based on the reformatted and MUCH improved article. Nice work Russavia. --Deadly∀ssassin^(talk) 04:14, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Commment Thanks Deadly∀ssassin, it would be a shame to have lost an article which can be useful. Perhaps others can take it on to reformat other lists in such a way, makes them more presentable and provides more useful info at same time. --Russavia (talk) 08:17, 14 March 2008 (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.