Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Helion Venture Partners (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 no consensus. No discussion since the third relist. Keep and delete !votes bring up good points, but there's no clear consensus at this time. Past two relisters appear to agree that the discussion was verging on no consensus before relisting and consensus has not developed since. (non-admin closure) clpo13(talk) 16:54, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Helion Venture Partners
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

no evidence of notability. A list of a companies investments is not an encycopedia article. The references, as would be expected,are mere notices about those investments, not substantial sources about the firm.  DGG ( talk ) 10:08, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America1000 14:57, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. North America1000 14:57, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Weak keep as I believe there are enough RS. 24.114.78.27 (talk) 22:00, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete as I simply see nothing better. Pinging past users, and .  SwisterTwister   talk  20:05, 5 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep sufficient reliable sources to meet notability criteria RadioFan (talk) 20:52, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - we have never kept funds' articles based on their investments, for which notability is not inherited anyway. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bearian (talk • contribs) 19:58, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Mauritius-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:42, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:42, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep sufficient reliable sources and wikipedia is relied upon by Indian users to find resources — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.164.160.178 (talk) 19:16, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sam Sailor Talk! 00:52, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete no evidence of notability, sources are passing mentions or not reliable 73.138.114.150 (talk) 18:57, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - run of the mill WP:ARTSPAM by single-purpose account. Undisclosed paid editing is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not. Subject is not notable. Citobun (talk) 11:15, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Keep per the significant coverage in reliable sources.  The article notes: "There’s another new startup fountain in town in India, after Helion Venture Partners announced its fourth fund worth $300 million. Helion is the latest in a flurry of firms to raise money for investments in fast-growing India. ... With its new fund, Helion — which includes Housing.com, TaxiForSure, and Komli among its portfolio — is again targeting early to mid stage tech startups in India. Typical investments will range from $1 million to $10 million, and the fund is expected to last for three to four years, according to Helion co-founder Sanjeev Aggarwal. ...  Helion, which was founded in 2009, will put around three-quarters of the fund towards startups that are helping digitize the national economy, for example those involved in retail, travel, insurance and, loans, Aggarwal said. The remainder will be set aside for Indian companies with the potential to do business globally, for example analytics, enterprise software and other “next generation outsourcing businesses.”"  The article notes: "Helion’s recent investments – In February Helion invested Rs 30 crore Hyper local products discovery platform Wooplr. The funds will be used for hiring and expanding Wooplr’s presence in the country. – Helion also participated in a $100 million funding round for e-commerce site ShopClues in January. In March 2013, ShopClues had raised $10 million from Helion Venture Partners, Nexus Partners and Netprice.com CEO Teruhide Sato  – Personalised home furnishings provider Livspace raised $4.6 million in a series A round of funding led by Helion Venture Partners and Bessemer Venture Partners in December 2014.  –  In September 2014, Bangalore-based online grocery retailer BigBasket has raised Rs 200 crore investment in a round led by Helion Ventures and Zodius Capital and participation from existing investors Ascent Capital and LionRock Capital.  – Online recruitment platform TalentPad in October raised an undisclosed amount of investment from Helion Ventures."  The article notes: "Helion Venture Partners, an early-to-mid-stage venture capital firm, is raising $300 million (Rs 1,900 crore) for its fourth fund Helion Venture Fund IV, a company spokesperson told VCCircle. The VC firm is still on the road to raise funds and is in talks with both new and existing offshore investors. The average ticket size of the investment from the new fund will be in the $1-10 million bracket, much like its previous funds. It expects to back 20-25 companies from the new fund and will focus on technology and tech-powered firms only. In the past, the firm has backed a few non-tech consumer services firms such as salon chain YLG and restaurant chain Mast Kalandar. ...  Founded in 2006, the VC firm currently manages $605 million across three funds. It has backed names like MakeMyTrip, Pubmatic, TaxiForSure and RedBus, some of which it has exited.  The firm is currently led by two senior managing directors Ashish Gupta and Sanjeev Aggarwal. Last year another co-founder and senior managing director Kanwaljit Singh had quit the firm." <li> The article notes: "Helion had launched its first fund, of $140 million, in 2006. This was followed by a $210-million fund in 2008 and a third one of $255 million in 2012. ... While the first fund was completely IT focused, 90 per cent of the second was also deployed with a focus on technology so was the third fund, though it invested in other sectors as well, such as green tech (Azure Power), education (GTT, Attano, Vienova), financial services (NetAmbit, Shubham), health care (Eye Q, LifeCell), and IT-enabled real estate plays. Srikanth and Goyal said the fourth fund would not change its focus on IT and related segments. ... Since its inception in 2006, Helion has invested in about 50 companies in various sectors including consumer tech, enterprise tech (business and infra), and technology-enabled services, among others."</li> <li> The article notes: "Helion Venture Partners, India's largest domestic venture capital firm with assets of $605 million under management, is in talks to sell its stake in investment research outsourcing firm Amba Research."</li> <li> The article notes: "Mauritius registered early to mid stage India focused fund, Helion Venture Partners has closed a $255 million fund, said Sanjeev Aggarwal, Senior Managing Director, Helion Advisors. This is Helion's third fund. Helion, who have invested in companies like Make My Trip, Komli Media, redBus and SMS Gupshup, had raised a $140 million fund in 2006 and a $210 million fund in 2008. The first two funds are almost fully invested, the venture firm said."</li> </ol>There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Helion Venture Partners to pass Notability, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard (talk) 07:56, 21 November 2015 (UTC) </li></ul>
 * According to The Economic Times, Helion Venture Partners in 2012 was "India's largest domestic venture capital firm with assets of $605 million under management". In March 2012, the firm received significant coverage in The Economic Times for closing a $255 million fund. In August 2012, it received coverage during talks to sell its stake in Amba Research. In 2015, the firm received significant coverage about its fourth fund from TechCrunch, MediaNama, VCCircle, and Business Standard. The sustained coverage demonstrates that Helion Venture Partners passes Notability.  Cunard (talk) 07:56, 21 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete. Fails WP:GNG and for sure this is SPAM. Check Articles for deletion/Photo Researchers also - same case. Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk)  16:21, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
 * What do you mean by "same case"? The two articles have no overlapping editors. The only similarity is that I participated in both discussions. Other than the portfolio list, the only text in the article is: "Helion Ventures Partners is an Indian focused venture fund based in Mauritius. It manages US $600M and invests in early to mid-stage companies in India in sectors such as Outsourcing, Internet, Mobile, Technology Products, Retail, Education and Financial Services. Helion is advised by a team of India based advisors with offices in Bangalore and Gurgaon. The advisors help the fund to select companies to invest in. And post investment the advisors work with the companies in areas such as finance, Human Resources, technology, marketing and operations." How is this spam? This is neutrally written content. Cunard (talk) 23:39, 27 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete Non-notable company. Eden&#39;s Apple (talk) 17:58, 27 November 2015 (UTC) — Eden's Apple (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * The company has received significant coverage in TechCrunch, MediaNama, VCCircle, Business Standard, and The Economic Times. A 2012 article in The Economic Times called it "India's largest domestic venture capital firm with assets of $605 million under management". This clearly establishes that Helion Venture Partners is notable. Cunard (talk) 23:39, 27 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Weak keep as per quite a few references following a brief Google search. However, the article should be restructured and a minor nuking done (if I may) to make the article encyclopedic. smileguy91talk - contribs 03:10, 28 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete This was a close call, because some coverage does exist, as shown by the keep votes above. However, after looking through these, it seems to me that they are lists of investments, rather than substantive coverage of the company itself, and therefore do not count towards the substantive coverage needed to meet GNG. Vanamonde93 (talk) 05:21, 28 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment This is needs to be rewritten so badly I think it's affecting judgement of the article itself which is why I'm staying neutral here. --<i style="color:#B00000; font-family:Casual;">MurderByDeadcopy</i><i style="color:black;">"bang!"</i> 05:35, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
 * , I don't think the article needed to be rewritten because it was neutrally written, but I have rewritten the article. Cunard (talk) 06:31, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Ah, I wasn't referring to the POV of the article so much as my own POV when reading said article, however, you did actually improve the article enough to solve my initial poor reaction to the article. Kudos! --<i style="color:#B00000; font-family:Casual;">MurderByDeadcopy</i><i style="color:black;">"bang!"</i> 07:52, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you for reviewing the article. As long as no speedy deletion criteria apply, I think the article's quality should not be a factor in determining whether the article should be kept per Notability, Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions, and Editing policy. Cunard (talk) 07:58, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Let us try one more week before it gets closed as no consensus.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:30, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep It may be a weak keep, however, since I was on the fence and some of that had to do with the article lacking an encyclopedic structuring (until Cunard gave the article a better balance) I've decided to go with keep. Also, I hate being on the fence about anything!!! --<i style="color:#B00000; font-family:Casual;">MurderByDeadcopy</i><i style="color:black;">"bang!"</i> 07:52, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ymblanter (talk) 08:30, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment and I seem to have a basic disagreement, but I think it can be resolved. As I see it, there are many reasons for deletion besides notability. Blatant advertising  is a speedy criterion--and not-blatent advertising is a violation of WP:NOT, and should therefore be deleted.  Yes, it is possible to fix it: just as its possible to fix an article that's a copyvio, by rewriting it. But in both cases,  if it isn't fixed, it must be removed.
 * The question now is 1)whether it is sufficiently fixed. I think it probably is, for Cunard does not what a proper article should be & I do not see myself questioning the work of an editor of his experience and skill. .  and 2) whether the references actually do show notability. I continue to think they do not. Articles just specifying  funding are mere announcements, not coverage in depth.   DGG ( talk ) 00:30, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Notability (organizations and companies) says: "Deep coverage provides an organization with a level of attention that extends well beyond routine announcements and makes it possible to write more than a very brief, incomplete stub about an organization." My rewrite of the article has proven that Helion Venture Partners has received "deep coverage" that is far beyond "Articles just specifying funding are mere announcements". I discuss the company's history, its founders, its four funds, the sectors it focuses on, and its exit strategy for three of the companies it invested in.  Cunard (talk) 01:52, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
 * <small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions.  Onel 5969  <i style="color:blue">TT me</i> 12:10, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Even after the extensive work by Cunard, their are substantive disagreements on policy points. Was going to "No Consensus", but a third relisting, especially since this is a 2nd nom, couldn't hurt.  Onel 5969  <i style="color:blue">TT me</i> 12:11, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Onel 5969  <i style="color:blue">TT me</i> 12:11, 6 December 2015 (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.