Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AC Ventures (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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. ✗ plicit  00:27, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

AC Ventures
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

I'm concerned that most of the sources listed here don't seem independent enough to unoquivically verify this fund's notability. Tech in Asia (TiA) dominates the reference list. However, WP's entry about TiA isn't in good standing but more importantly can Singaporean sources, specifically those that focus on business and tech be considered independent by WP's standards. Media censorship in Singapore says, "Instead of subscribing to the Western press model, it (Singapore) believes that a non-adversarial press can report accurately and objectively." So can a media outlet that's subject to state restrctions be considered independent? Then there's pieces like this KR-Asia profile https://kr-asia.com/unlocking-indonesias-economic-potential-ac-ventures-commitment-to-women-led-businesses-and-esg-investing which appears to be a repackaged press release with little or no editorial oversight. Judging by the page's maintenance tags and source list I think a discussion about this subject's notability is needed.~ 𝔓420°𝔓Holla 08:48, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, Technology,  and Indonesia.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  10:01, 1 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi GDX420, thank you so much for these inputs.
 * Duly noted your concerns about the coverages. I have removed the sources you mentioned, and will promptly replace them based on your comments.
 * From what I see, ACV is one of the reputable VCs in SEA, and they do have coverages from other reputable media aside from TiA, KrAsia.
 * I will revise the article accordingly, and then we can revisit this discussion again. 182.2.147.248 (talk) 11:00, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi DGX420, I have revised the article to be neutral in tone and replaced most of the links with more authoritative ones from a diverse source of websites. Please consider withdrawing your nomination. Further feedback is welcomed! Loxy Monster (talk) 10:05, 2 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Comment

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  12:46, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete: Based on the source table and the overly-PRish tone in most sources, I'm not seeing notability. I can't find any sort of sourcing either. Oaktree b (talk) 20:48, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 * "DealStreet Asia" and fancily-named sites that just reprint PR items are about the extent of it. Oaktree b (talk) 20:49, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete Agree with the source analysis, nothing I can find meet GNG/NCORP criteria for establishing notability.  HighKing++ 14:15, 9 December 2023 (UTC)


 * 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.