Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mena 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. Black Kite (talk) 09:50, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Mena Capital

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Non-notable company. The Fortune magazine "profile of MENA" is actually not a profile of this company; it is a review of investment opportunities in the Middle East and North Africa, a region known by the acronym MENA. The MENA company is mentioned, once, briefly, as the source of a single quote. Other references show similarly sketchy coverage. This investment firm does not appear to be anything by run of the mill. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 15:54, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

We should fix the reference then, but the notability of the company is that it's an influential private equity firm operating in the Middle East during a time of economic unrest associated with the Arab Spring. Their current AUM is low ($28 million), but that's down from over $100 million just a year ago - again, making them of interest and relevant. There aren't adequate Arab private equity firms investing in the MENA region represented in the private equity firm space on Wikipedia and this is a good candidate to help address that information gap. The firm is notable for being out front in encouraging investment in countries like Tunisia and Egypt during this period of political transition 12.171.157.178 (talk) 18:54, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment If there are better references to be found, please bring them forth. Confusion may arise from the fact that there is an unrelated real estate development company named MENA Capital in Lebanon, and that fact that the term "MENA capital" is a common term used in articles about the general capital funds market in the Middle East/North Africa region, but unrelated to this company. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 19:08, 10 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I included this profile after seeing them referenced in the Fortune article. My intention was to add them as an influential private equity firm for their work in the Middle East region investing in new Arab democracies while balancing the sharia-related challenges of Muslim "investing" - the firm appeared to me to meet the qualifications for inclusion based on other private equity firms listed, their formal reporting and coverage in high visibility mainstream news reporting (like Fortune). I characterized the Fortune reference as such because it included an interview with the firm's CEO, which I thought was the relevant link for those interested in the article and didn't mean to mischaracterize or present the information inappropriately. I intended this as a stub, for which additional work would be done by myself and others in the private equity working group recognizing that additional references and details would need to be provided.  It is noted as a start class profile in need of additional input and work.  As such, I hope it won't be deleted. AliceStanley11 (talk) 19:30, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Middle East-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 01:45, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 01:45, 11 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep. There are lots of obscure topics on Wikipedia. Don't see why this can't be one. Also agree with the IP on the niche here. TheSoundAndTheFury (talk) 14:41, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BusterD (talk) 20:50, 17 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete There may be obscure topics on WP, but that doesn't justify having more. For the record, there isn't enough secondary sources to make this company notable. The website for the company sure mentions itself, mission, staff, etc. But no secondary coverage, no independent sources to make this notable enough. If in fact it is an "influential" company a plethora (or at least a few) secondary sources would support this. As it is, that isn't the case.Jimsteele9999 (talk) 23:49, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete The Fortune article describes them, as " a small London-based hedge fund" & I see no information to indicate that the firm is significant. We have always held that just being one of the people interviewed by a journalist in connection with a single article on a topic is not evidence of notability. Being frequently interviewed as a major source on a topic can be another matter. If we were to have a criterion for funds of the sort, the monetary value would be the obvious demarcation: this firm is apparently worth only $12 million.      DGG ( talk ) 04:31, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete as lacking indepth independent coverage. Stuartyeates (talk) 09:15, 20 July 2012 (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.