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 procedural close. Article is now a redirect. (non-admin closure) Armbrust, B.Ed. ^{Let's talk}_{about my edits?} 09:15, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Safir Helipolitan Hotel (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Zero refs. Lacks substantial rs coverage. Tagged as an orphan for nearly 2 years. Epeefleche (talk) 19:13, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Notable hotel chain plenty of hits in google books, Kuwaiti owned company. Merged into article about the company.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:03, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Middle East-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:56, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:56, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. This AFD refers specifically to the Safir Helipolitan Hotel article, which was an article created with zero refs, tagged as an orphan for nearly 2 years, and which in my opinion lacked requisite substantial RS coverage. I recognize that mid-AFD the article creator has now merged the article into the parent article, and redirected the article, which I certainly have no problem with. I believe, though others should feel free to correct me, that the article creator's above !vote is actually a merge !vote under the circumstances, though he fashions it as a keep !vote, as this afd relates not to the parent article but to the zero-ref Safir Helipolitan Hotel article that has been redirected mid-afd. Happy new year to all.--Epeefleche (talk) 21:18, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Close, the already-accomplished merge is the best solution. Neither "keep" not "delete" would result in a better situation, and "merge" or "redirect" are irrelevant because both things have already been done. Nyttend (talk) 01:22, 2 January 2012 (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.