Talk:Rockefeller Capital Management

Source analysis
I have anlaysed the references in this permalink to the best of my ability in the table below. I have been unable to see the elements that are behind paywalls, and leave that to others to assess Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 13:41, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

The notability hangs, for me, on the elements behind paywalls that I have been unable to inspect. Pinging who has an interest in this draft. Please note that this analysis is my own opinion, and is a subjective analysis unless and until modified and/or ratified by oyther editors in good standing.

My firm advice is to remove anything that even feels like a PR piece, if necessary removing also the alleged fact it purports to reference. Fiddle Timtrent Faddle Talk to me 13:41, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Discussion coming tomorrow. As usual, we mostly but not completely agree--we look with slightly different concerns,& I think I can get to some of the paywalled articles.  DGG ( talk ) 08:58, 4 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Disagreement is good. It means that eventual thoughts are better because of it. I can be persuaded by good arguments, as can you. Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 14:16, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Significant coverage
For your consideration, here is a list of some full articles in major publications I have found.



--TerryBG (talk) 01:12, 5 September 2021 (UTC)


 * @TerryBG Please read and understand WP:RS. Further reading is at WP:RSP. Please understand PR and Press Release material, whether issued verbatim or rehashed or regurgitated in some manner, adds precisely nothing to WP:N. Recognising PR material is very easy. I used to write a great deal of it professionally. Anything that even feels like PR does not belong on any list of potentially useful sources  Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 21:44, 5 September 2021 (UTC)