Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Acadian Asset Management


 * 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. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 08:27, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

Acadian Asset Management

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Sourced only to its own website since 2006. A search turned up the usual mildly promotional stuff, but nothing third-party in-depth which could be considered WP:RS. Fails WP:GNG and WP:CORPDEPTH. Narky Blert (talk) 18:15, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:19, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:19, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Noticed this article listed on the WP:WikiProject Finance & Investment page. I'm adding a number of articles, and a few of them arguably work at proving notability, in my opinion. A handful are on the brink of routine, so it is isn't a deluge, just a smattering at this point. 70.240.207.189 (talk) 19:59, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 10:00, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete I am unable to locate any significant coverage with in-depth information on the company and containing independent content.. References are based on interviews and fail the test for Independent Content as follows:
 * This Forbes article and this Forbes India article (largely the same content) relies on information provided by the company and based on an interview with one of their analysts. There is no Independent analysis/opinion/etc. Fails WP:ORGIND.
 * This Bloomberg article has no in-depth information on the company and is largely a commentary on the Chinese stock market with quotations from this company's analysts. No Independent Content on the company. Fails WP:CORPDEPTH and WP:ORGIND.
 * This from Financial News is based on a company announcement, fails WP:ORGIND
 * This Business Insider article is based on the company announcement of their partnership with Microsoft, relies on quotations from company officers and contains no Independent Content, fails WP:ORGIND.
 * This from Institutional Investor is entirely based on a phone interview with a company analyst, contains no Independent Content, fails WP:ORGIND.
 * Based on the lack of references that meet the criteria for establishing notability, topic fails GNG/WP:NCORP HighKing++ 13:18, 25 December 2019 (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.