Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BlackGen Capital


 * 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. Liz Read! Talk! 05:18, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

BlackGen Capital

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

Not enough independent, in-depth coverage. At first glance, it might look like it has a lot of coverage, but most of them are PR and primary sources, i.e., interviews with the CEO. For example this from Bloomberg and this from MSN are the same source containing nothing but an interview at some conference. Tame (talk) 08:05, 15 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete: Fails WP:NCORP. I was actually in the middle of PRODing the page but got hit by an edit conflict, heh. All of the sources appear to fail WP:IS. Padgriffin  Griffin's Nest 08:15, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 08:22, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 08:22, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 08:22, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 08:23, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2022 February 15.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 16:14, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:28, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Page has adequate independent sources listed upon the second review of sources and content within articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MatthewClarinson2 (talk • contribs) 18:03, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. While it might become important in the future, an investment fund with $60,000 in assets under management after two years of existence is simply not sufficiently notable. Pichpich (talk) 18:55, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2022 February 16.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 06:10, 16 February 2022 (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.