Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The London Bank of Australia and India

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 delete‎. ✗plicit 00:02, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The London Bank of Australia and India[edit]

[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)

Proposed bank which never actually operated (contrary to the claims in the article, which seems largely based on uninformed speculation based on the date and name). I can find no evidence for the following claims in the article; (infobox) the type, industry, date and name of foundation, date defunct, number of locations, products; (article) "winding down of its operations", "was notable", "largely served customers of...", nationality and background of staff, final years (!), and legacy (a "key role in the history of banking in India"???). In reality, we have one source which gives a bit of attention to the bank[1], and the remainder are simple name drops or listings in tables, nothing significant; all these make it clear that the bank was never operational, it collected money to start operations and returned the money when it couldn't start in the end, and thus was never operational. I have no idea where the "facts" in this article have been taken from. Fram (talk) 09:01, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Economics, India, and Australia. Fram (talk) 09:01, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have also nominated The East India Bank (1842), created by the same (since blocked) editor, with the same issues, including the exact same claims of "The bank was staffed by mostly British nationals who were drawn mainly from the East India Company" and "The bank played a key role in the history of Banking in India". Fram (talk) 09:04, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Info - Note to closer for soft deletion: While this discussion appears to have no quorum, it is NOT eligible for soft deletion because it has been previously PROD'd (via summary).

Logs: 2023-02 ✍️ create

--Cewbot (talk) 00:05, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles (talk) 20:06, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The citation "Banking in India" specifically says The Bank was therefore never brought into active operation. Furthermore, the citation to the Reserve Bank of India actually labels it as "stillborn". So the article's statement that "the bank played a key role" is unjustified. Perhaps the failure caused some change in approach or legislation, who knows? But there is no cited information about this. So I think the article fails content as well as on WP:N Rick Jelliffe (talk) 01:32, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:43, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. The person who loves reading (talk) 15:56, 11 June 2023 (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.