Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Funding Circle


 * 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 keep. RL0919 (talk) 22:18, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

Funding Circle

 * – ( View AfD View log  Circle Stats )

DELETE This article is a clear attempt at using Wikipedia as advertising. In the article talk page, there are multiple listings created by someone claiming to be an employee and asking for edits to be made to the article. I question how organic this article. I'm not questioning the company having a page on Wikipedia, I question, the intent behind the material in the article. In my option, if you remove content in the article that could be deemed advertising, 90% or more the article would be removed, leaving you with a very unnotable article. (Bes2224 (talk) 21:37, 22 December 2019 (UTC))

Keep This is a major entity listed on the London Stock Exchange. Until recently it was actually a member of the FTSE 250 Index which lists the largest companies by market capitalisation. Per WP:LISTED it is inherently notable. Dormskirk (talk) 21:22, 22 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment The employee who asked for edits to be made to the article has followed exactly the right procedure in accordance with WP:COI. It would be quite wrong the employee to have done anything else e.g. edit the article directly. I am not sure why you do not have a go at editing the article yourself. I have already removed some advertising material. Per WP:Deletion policy "Disputes over page content are usually not dealt with by deleting the page, except in severe cases". Dormskirk (talk) 21:45, 22 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2019 December 22.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 21:53, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:57, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:57, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

DELETE - After reading through the citations in the article I was surprised what had been left out vs included. Further I've discovered that the articles' projection of a stable and growing quickly company is unbalanced relative to for example coverage from the Financial Times https://www.ft.com/stream/c13dacd6-60af-4314-861a-98cfb0368cb9 (even the fact that the IPO lost ~30% of it's value on it's first day of trading being missing from the article is another example of big deal things that are missing are happen to be unflattering that are missing). Here is an example of recent 2019 coverage (check the link to see recent coverage headlines): Therefore the article is currently entirely misleading for readers in nature and would require a near total rewrite to reflect balance relative to reliable news sources WestportWiki (talk) 00:20, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
 * 'A fintech false dawn for London’s stock exchange Premium - Funding Circle’s dire debut has left hopes of a 2019 listings rush unfulfilled' NOVEMBER 25 2019,
 * 'Funding Circle tries to ease fears over withdrawals - P2P lender sends letter to investors in effort to allay capitalisation concerns' (OCTOBER 11 2019),
 * 'Funding Circle losses widen as bad debts in UK worsen - Higher costs offset rise in first-half revenue, UK-based lender says' (AUGUST 8 2019),
 * 'Funding Circle warns growth is slowing. Shares tumble' (JULY 2 2019),
 * 'Funding Circle halves growth forecast for this year' (JULY 2 2019)
 * 'Fintech Funding Circle shows valuations are a binary choice - Warning exposes the persistent bugs in the peer-to-peer lending program' (JULY 2 2019),
 * 'Funding Circle investment trust to be wound up - Decision to close Funding Circle SME Income comes after returns had stalled' (APRIL 5 2019),
 * 'Losses at Funding Circle jump 40%' (MARCH 7 2019)


 * Comment I have inserted all the above stories into the article and also an additional one dated September 2019 stating that the Press Association is reporting that lenders face a near 100-day wait to sell off unwanted loans. I have no interest in this company. I just want to demonstrate that a re-write is always possible - it just takes a bit of time and effort. Article deletions should always be a last resort - especially for a company that is getting so much coverage - admittedly negative. Best wishes. Dormskirk (talk) 01:27, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment Ok Keep - page still needs work; I'll spend some time contributing. Changing from Delete to Keep given that the page is being improve to be more neutral. WestportWiki (talk) 20:00, 23 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep - Did anyone check Google Books? There is this from what appears to be an education textbook and this as well which includes a case study on the company. These are just two of several that I pulled. Not all of the press is positive either, including this from the FTs. AfD is not cleanup and this can be taken to a stub very easy to alleviate any promotional tone. As it stands, I don't think WP:TNT applies. --CNMall41 (talk) 04:45, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment Great. I have now included the books under "further reading". Many thanks. Dormskirk (talk) 09:27, 23 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep: The company has attracted coverage in multiple sources, not just the paywalled FT but also a BBC News article, a commentary item in The Guardian, as well as the "Funding for SMEs" case study identified above, which amounts to substantial coverage. AllyD (talk) 07:52, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment Brilliant. I have now inserted all these additional stories into the article. Many thanks. Dormskirk (talk) 09:27, 23 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep. Article has existed since 2011. Subject has received significant media coverage, both positive and negative, over an extended period. The article covers both positive and negative developments for the company. This is a notable subject and the article is in no way spammy. Improvements can be discussed on the talk page but I see absolutely no case for deletion. --DanielRigal (talk) 19:42, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep A major company with significant coverage. The concerns about WP:COI are justified, and vigilance is needed to keep the article neutrally worded, but doesn't justify deleting it. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 20:59, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep There are multiple analyst reports available for this company - e.g. Merill Lynch, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Citi, etc. For the purposes of establishing notability, analyst reports may be used, therefore topic meets GNG/NCORP.  HighKing++ 15:30, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. The subject received significant media coverage, so the issue was combined with WP:NCORP.- Nahal (T) 19:23, 29 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.