Talk:Nakheel Properties

message: :Image:The Nakheel Logo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:53, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No I used to the popups to remove the weblink that you inserted and that was an automatic edit summary.
 (Revert to the revision prior to revision 147620425 dated 2007-07-28 07:12:59 by Belanda Gila using popups) (undo) --Ad@m.J.W.C. 06:55, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:The Nakheel Logo.jpg

message: :Image:Nakheel2.svg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 23:17, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Nakheel2.svg

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Nakheel Properties. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110718222918/http://www.cunard.com/AboutCunard/NewsReleases.asp?.Cat=&View=ViewArticle&Mode=News&ContentID=6656& to http://www.cunard.com/AboutCunard/NewsReleases.asp?.Cat=&View=ViewArticle&Mode=News&ContentID=6656&
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:24, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Under WP:SIRS for WP:CORP:
No                      	Source                  	Significant?            	Independent?            	Reliable?               	Secondary?              	Pass/Fail	Notes
1                       	                        	                        	                        	                        	                        	         	An article specifically about Nakheel in the Financial Times.
2                       	                        	                        	                        	                        	                        	         	An article about Nakheel debt payments in The New York Times.
3                       	                        	                        	                        	                        	                        	         	An article specifically about Nakheel in the Financial Times.
4                       	                        	                        	                        	                        	                        	         	An article specifically about Nakheel senior personnel change in The Wall Street Journal.
5                       	                        	                        	                        	                        	                        	         	An article specifically about Nakheel in The Wall Street Journal.
6                       	                        	                        	                        	                        	                        	         	An article specifically about Nakheel in the Financial Times.
Total qualifying sources	Total qualifying sources	Total qualifying sources	Total qualifying sources	Total qualifying sources	Total qualifying sources	4        	
Does this not constitute notability in Wikipedia terms for Draft:Nakheel Properties? —Jonathan Bowen (talk) 18:08, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think this kind of lobbying helps your case. I picked one at random (the 2nd) and noticed that the subject of this article is mentioned once, briefly at the end. It is not significant, substantial coverage. If you would like to re-do the table above, but this time make a serious attempt to verify the sources I might be willing to have another look. --Salimfadhley (talk) 14:29, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: This random selection is the only one without "Nakheel" in the title. Are not the ones with "Nakheel" in the title "significant, substantial coverage"? You could argue #4 is about the chairman, but what about #1. #3, #5, #6? —Jonathan Bowen (talk) 16:10, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  Here's a good one from WSJ: .  It's better to use than Construction Weekly, which just regurgitates what Nakheel says. S0091 (talk) 16:54, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for the additional reference in a major international independent newspaper. —Jonathan Bowen (talk) 15:16, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

text: Those are paywalled articles. I cannot review them, however the titles suggest that they are just routine coverage and not substantial or significant coverage. Salimfadhley (talk) 14:58, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree in major national/international newspapers like these, they are not industry newspapers that just reproduce press releases, but I hope the updated article can be reviewed by another editor, hopefully with better access. —Jonathan Bowen (talk) 15:16, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Notability