Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Commodity Discovery Fund


 * 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. Vanamonde (Talk) 18:10, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

Commodity Discovery Fund

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

Highly promotional article about a non-notable fund, lacks secondary coverage or evidence of notability beyond its mere existence as an investment fund. Fails WP:NCORP; WP:GNG. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 04:30, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Companies,  and Netherlands. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 04:30, 18 October 2022 (UTC)


 * As I am the author of the article please guide me to improve it to prevent deletion. I do not agree that it is a non-notable fund especially compared to many many other small funds that have a wikipedia page. The founder Willem Middelkoop is an important international thought leader on all matters financial. He has an extensive Dutch wikipedia page since he is very well known in the Netherlands. He has written many books on finance and has coined the term "super inflation" in an English interview. In the light of the current inflation I am working on a number of Wikipedia pages that relate the this predicament. I am a senior copywriter but relatively new to Wikipedia. I am trying to learn as fast as I can what will do on wikipedia and what wont. I was working on a Willem Middelkoop (who currently is traveling the world giving speeches and participating in panel discussions) page in english but that one got rejected right away due to a lack of external sources. So I decided to make a Commodity Discovery Fund first quoting only from external sources. You say it's too promotional. So please go ahead and take out what you find unfitting. But deletion? I don't think that's appropriate. Look at this page for instance: Powering Australian Renewables Fund . If that fund has a wikipedia page then Commodity Discovery Fund should really have one. Especially I am sure that Middelkoop merits an english page (compare https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Willem_Middelkoop). So please help me out how I can work on various inflation related matters and stay within wikipedia's guidelines. It is my ambition to become a valued member of the tribe. Hajosmit (talk) 17:38, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I just added a paragraph about the not so good results of the fund. This is important additional information since the growth of the fund until now has mostly been inflow of new capital rather that gains on the investments. The fund and it's owner founder represent an important economic monetary debate that's raging in these years of rabid money printing and recently high inflation. I really want to make the article sound and good for Wikipedia before further building Willem Middelkoops lemma in english. See this english interview with more than 1 million views: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-8FYpusTYg        Hajosmit (talk) 20:32, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Have been reading these guidelines now: Notability (organizations and companies)
 * Independent reliable sources for CD Fund exist. Will adapt the article accordingly.
 * I presume youtube channels like this also count as reliable: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gu1uLzFPy4Q  Hajosmit (talk) 08:26, 22 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete. I see a lot of gesturing but do not see evidence of WP:SIGCOV in WP:RS. I also see the common Dutch country name confusion, this time topped by confusion around the University of Queensland. Kudos to the nominator for a fine nomination. With AfDs, when we decrease the quantity, the quality increases! gidonb (talk) 14:31, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your comment. I understand how you come to interpret my arguments as "gesturing"... and I'm reading these policies for the first time and see how you come to your mistrust. I was hoping for discussion and now I have it. I want to learn. In your opinion are mining websites like https://www.miningstockeducation.com/ and https://www.kitco.com reliable sources concerning the mining world? I would say yes. You? Also could you tell me how this fund for example is notable: Powering Australian Renewables Fund. As a Dutch native I have no idea what you mean by "Dutch country name confusion". I can't have made any mistakes here. And I mention the University of Brisbane. Not Queensland. Felt it was appropriate to suggest someone makes a page. Is that not OK? Please inform me ....   Hajosmit (talk) 07:53, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
 * It's OK. Folks who live in the Netherlands are often confused about the Netherlands. Can you please link to the homepage of your "University of Brisbane"? The links you provide look nothing like WP:RS that would support notability. Data references: sure. But, to keep, the basic notability of a topic must be established. Powering Australian Renewables Fund doesn't look notable either. Per WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, we do not copy mistakes from one article (in this case the mistake is the article's very existence) to another! Rather, we aim to correct all mistakes. The correction would be deleting both. And fair disclosure: do you get paid by Willem Middelkoop or an affiliated company or are you invested in this fund? gidonb (talk) 23:06, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your informative reply. Funny the compilation at WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. My exact goal is to get to know the Wikipedia community and it's rules and guidelines. I know Middelkoop personally and have done some paid copywriting for his firm, like make a brochure, write a blog etc.. I proposed to work on his Dutch Wikipedia page and there I have made many improvements that have been retained. The work in English I do pro bono also to learn. I might offer sponsored Wikipedia editing service in the future, which as far as I have seen is allowed. Question: someone has marked my page as a "stub" and added Category:Dutch company stubs. I have checked this category page and was surprised to find tons of non notable companies including many restaurants. As an example I wonder I you feel if this is a notable company: FD Mediagroep. Not as in "otherstuffexists" but just to learn. You must be able to tell me how I could alter the CD Fund page to make it acceptable. Lastly: I still don't understand what "Netherlands" stuff I made confusing or what's up with the University of Brisbane link (to non existent page). Waiting for your answers.     Hajosmit (talk) 07:28, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
 * If you put a link here to the homepage of your "University of Brisbane", I can understand what you meant. Just copy and paste the URL! FD Mediagroep is individually notable but best merged into its parent that we do not yet carry. I have actually done a lot of work on media companies, for example here and here. This is where I would like to go with company articles in general. gidonb (talk) 09:42, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
 * There is no "my" University of Brisbane. I just thought a University should always have a Wikipedia page and so I might as well opt for the red colored link to non existing page. Is that not done? Please inform me. Or just change it on the page to what it should be. I already have the citation of the study so a separate external link to the university makes no sense.
 * Then I still don't now what you meant by Dutch/Netherlands confusion since I don't see any.
 * Your Lannoo and DPG Media pages are impressive to say the least. Both certainly merit a Wikipedia page. I agree that Wikipedia shouldn't become a company listing where companies can post stubs with promo blabla. But if a company is relevant to historic developments like commodities, inflation, war, energy transition etc then it does merit a page. Certainly one could argue "OK let's wait 20 years and decide then". I don't know how current Wikipedia tries to be..... I thought yes.    Hajosmit (talk) 10:21, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you but I still do not know what you meant by the "University of Brisbane". Is it the University of Queensland or the "Holistic University of Brisbane"? To your question, we already carry articles for all or virtually all accredited universities worldwide. We have some articles also for nonaccredited "universities" but try not to be complete in this field. Also here I did some work, for example. If you do not find an article on an organization that calls itself university this is because it is not a real university OR because you are confused about the name of a real university, in addition to the country name confusion. gidonb (talk) 03:26, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:34, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:SIGCOV. A search yielded no secondary sources with significant coverage on the Commodity Discovery Fund.4meter4 (talk) 01:53, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Alternatives I do not agree that the news sources from the mining sector fail WP:NCORP. Just one question. If you look at the long standing Dutch page https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Willem_Middelkoop do you feel that Willem Middelkoop personally merits a page on the English Wikipedia? I could rework the company page to a personal page if you insist, yet I still believe that both merit pages, both company and the founder. I mean Wikipedia is not just for names everyone knows like Goldman Sachs or Warren Buffet. Put yourself in the shoes of an English native who sees an interview with CD Fund / Willem Middelkoop and searches it or him to know a little more. Final practical question: is there a visual editor to add new items on the discussion page? This one I did in the code editor. Hajosmit (talk) 10:23, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
 * The fact that Nlwiki allows for this WP:COI WP:OR WP:BLP to exist in its current state is a disgrace. It's not a coincidence as Nlwiki is known for bad quality. This is further explained, for example, under the headers quality and culture at Dutch Wikipedia. gidonb (talk) 13:01, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks I learned some more.... I'm reading all these guidelines.... very helpful thank you. Concerning COI: I'm an academic with an academic interest in matters. As you see in the paragraph Mixed Results I have no interest to make the page promotional. I am aiming at a factual sourced description of the fund. I am waiting for suggestions to make alterations. Lastly: could you elaborate a bit abut how Nlwiki could have such different standards? At WP:COI  by the way I see that paid editing is allowed but should be revealed. I will start studying  Articles for Creation (AfC)  as well. I was not aware that exists. For the funds page I'm waiting for constructive suggestions to redact...               Hajosmit (talk) 17:43, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Even so, you had to tell upfront that Middelkoop pays you. I figured out that you are a paid contributor when I checked if your user belongs to Middelkoop. Nlwiki has too many articles on too few editors and admins. A lot of what is written in Nlwiki is complete nonsense. Compare it, for example, with the English, German, and Hebrew wikipedias that are much better. It's not the entire problem but only for this reason, already, they cannot but miserably fail. The rest makes the situation even worse. gidonb (talk) 21:28, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Middelkoop doesn't pay me for anything I do on Wikipedia. This I consider a hobby and a learning project. I'm already learning a lot thanks to people like you. I just said that because in principle paid editing is allowed that in the future once I'm fully aware of all Wikipedia guidelines I would consider doing some paid editing on subjects not related to donors. But if you say that just because in the past Middelkoop has paid me for a few copywriting matters, I need to indicate that, I'm happy to do so. Still: even though OTHERSTUFFEXISTS actually other stuff does exist also on the English Wikipedia. Check: BlackRock World Mining Trust. So if we would scale back Commodity Discovery Fund to such a short simple lemma would you be OK with it? Or are you going to nominate BlackRock World Mining Trust for deletion as well? I'm still wating for suggestions for alternatives.      Hajosmit (talk) 08:10, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I believe this article should be deleted period. No merge, rewrite, redirect, or anything else. gidonb (talk) 10:49, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
 * And how does it work with consensus in Youtube? How is it arrived at? How many editors should look at each case? PS I still don't agree especially when I see BlackRock World Mining Trust. You say that the English Wikipedia is very strict .. well then ... Hajosmit (talk) 13:09, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
 * What I find even more bizarre is that BlackRock World Mining Trust is NOT marked for deletion, but as a STUB. I find that great in principle, but I would suspect that the lemma needs to be set-up such that the notability is proven first, then expanded. Commodity Discovery Fund is much more notable than the former since it actively engages in societal debate about the monetary system, commodities, inflation etc.. Hajosmit (talk) 07:19, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
 * It sure has been answered before. It's WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS and as such does not belong here. gidonb (talk) 18:27, 28 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Alternatives I just realized that from the mining world there are some lemma's that would definitively merit a page and that I could work on in the coming weeks. Like the Lassonde Curve as introduced by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Lassonde (could also make a paragraph in his lemma), of which there are plenty independent sources. Then there is the Uganda Gold Announcement which has been extrensively covered by tons of media: https://www.reuters.com/article/uganda-gold-idUSKBN2NP17M . Could merit its own page or a paragraph on the Uganda page. I hope you would support me staring on these pages. And... Carthago delenda est ehhhh I remain on he position that some form of Commodity Discovery Fund page merits retention.   Hajosmit (talk) 18:44, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment. This AFD has been improperly relisted by a participant. The discussion should be closed as delete when the first relist expires. gidonb (talk) 18:25, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I went ahead and removed the improper relist. gidonb (talk) 22:40, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Perfect. I don't really understand what that was for when Liz did that. I thought for not nesting too many layers of answers. Apparently not? Will you also answer my questions? Appreciate your time.   Hajosmit (talk) 17:40, 29 October 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.