Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Saga Petroleum LLC (2nd nomination)

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. Sources brought up during this discussion have been found to either be primary or to refer to a different company with the same name. Thank you for your careful review. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:50, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Saga Petroleum LLC

Saga Petroleum LLC (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)

One of the worst articles I've ever come across, previous AfD was a farce. Zero secondary sources. No evidence of significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources per

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Colorado. AusLondonder (talk) 16:50, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - my own search came up with nothing establishing notability. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 00:51, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. There's something in the
  Wall Street Journal, May 11, 1999 - Norsk Hydro Offers $2.23 Billion In Stock to Buy Saga Petroleum - By Bhushan Bahree Staff Reporter of The Wall Street Journal .... There's something about the company here involving legal action which we know would generate other news, Casper Star-Tribune, Monday, June 14, 2010 - Page 26 .... and DEQ, March 16, 2018 - Montana Air Quality Permit #2770-11 a transfer to Blue Sky Energy. Something here on Casetext, 11-12-2015 - Nucor, Inc. v. PetroHawk Energy Corp. .... And there's CMI - Chr. Michelsen Institute, 2000 - The Snorre Field and the rise and fall of Saga Petroleum - Hildegunn Kyvik Nordås (2000). At the very least there's a good reason to consider a redirect. The problem is that we rely on Google and often it's a case of "If it ain't in Google then it don't exist". Well, I've often found that to be the case with how some folk look at things. In the past I've been given mineral and mining publications. Not exciting stuff for most people but within the industry they were relied upon for valuable information, and we sometimes have to look at things in a different perspective. When you go to the physical then there's content there that makes a whole world of difference. Karl Twist (talk) 12:19, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]

  @Karl Twist: I have just been looking at the sources you have provided. The first source is about Saga Petroleum, a Norwegian company of the same name. The second source appears to be a classified advertisement placed by a government official, which does not establish notability. The third source is a letter from a government department, obviously doesn't assist. The next source is a primary source, a legal case not even directly involving Saga Petroleum LLC. The final source is again about the unrelated Norwegian company. AusLondonder (talk) 13:59, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. Article needs a great amount of improving. Karl Twist (talk)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:56, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete can't find anything that suggests notability, fails
  WP:CORP --Devokewater 22:57, 28 March 2024 (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.