Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bridgewater Bank

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. RL0919 (talk) 21:29, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bridgewater Bank

[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)

Per WP:NORG, WP:Notability, and WP:Permastub, and following the lead of User:Piotrus and User:Mrschimpf, this article may not be notable or, if it is, it is either a permastub or an emerging permastub. Its edits have been few and far between over the years, often limited to trivial cleanup or adding tags. It could easily be consolidated into Alberta Motor Association, which wholly owns this small Canadian bank, as a separate section, if it isn't already, as was done with CTBC Bank (Canada) into CTBC Bank. Doug Mehus (talk) 20:05, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:34, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:34, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:34, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. As written, fails WP:NORG. Operating for a bit over 10 years, not historically significant. Ping me if there are new sources/arguments presented so I can reconsider my vote. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:19, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:NCORP; the only sources online are about a different bank in Minneapolis. The only sources provided are either from their website, or merely passing mentions. Luke ^Talk 20:09, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hei314, Interesting. I was doing a quotation mark-enclosed phrase search, so no results showed up for the Minnesota-based Bridgewater Bank. This further adds to the need to delete this article, in case that bank were notable (although, it, too, does not appear to be). Doug Mehus (talk) 20:15, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Non-notable bank. No significant coverage per WP:CORP. SL93 (talk) 23:09, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Bridgewater Bancshares/Bridgewater Bank is listed as one of the top five top bank stocks to purchase and is indexed by NASDAQ. [1] [2] [3] For a company to reach this level, it *obviously* has to be notable. That’s not something a local credit union would achieve. I actually feel a bit surprised that my opinion here seems to be in the minority, but stand by it. Eliko007 (talk) 20:48, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Eliko007, (1) No, Bridgewater Bancshares is an entirely separate company from Bridgewater Bank. The two have NOTHING to do with each other; thus, I request you, or an admin, strike your vote and (2) publicly-traded does not equal notability. In this case, though, this company is not publicly-traded. It is an insignificant, non-notable bank subsidiary that deals chiefly in the deposit and mortgage broker space. It generates little press coverage, all of it trite, trivial, and insignificant. Doug Mehus (talk) 20:52, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:NCORP. scope_creep^Talk 21:32, 12 October 2019 (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.