Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Private equity firms


 * 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. — Kurykh  22:28, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Private equity firms

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

listcruft, unsourced, very few blue links - also see this WikiEN-l post. Will (talk) 23:39, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
 * We have Category:Private equity firms, which is on first glance appropriate and selective. This list article is, as I mentioned on wikien-l, bad.  No sources, nearly all the links are redlinks, unverifyable, likely spam.  Delete.  Change any links to this article to links to the category.  Georgewilliamherbert 00:00, 10 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete Wikipedia is not: "Mere collections of internal links, except for disambiguation pages when an article title is ambiguous, and for structured lists to assist with the organisation of articles."WolfKeeper 23:56, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete list of red links of many firms nobody has heard of. List is probably a copyvio from some directory to be so comprehensive. transfer of the blue linked to private equity, and redirect Ohconfucius 06:34, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
 * DO NOT DELETE There are very few resources of this quality available to list private equity firms. Category:Private equity firms is a minimal list of firms many of which have been added by their respective employees.  May want to remove the broken links.  Wikipedia is not: "there is nothing wrong with having lists if their entries are famous because they are associated with or significantly contributed to the list topic...Wikipedia also includes reference tables and tabular information for quick reference." -comment added by  Relocator100 (WolfKeeper 19:23, 11 July 2007 (UTC))
 * yeah but the Wikipedis is not a directory: Directories, directory entries, electronic program guide, or a resource for conducting business.WolfKeeper 19:30, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
 * ...and there's no source information or reference information available to even identify the long list of companies which are currently redlinks. We don't know if they're famous entries or significantly contribute to the list topic.  Offhand, the ones in the blue links / in the category meet that definition.  The others... we don't even know if they're real or imaginary, serious or scams.  We can't have lists of that quality here.  If there are no reference sources for them, they need to go.  Georgewilliamherbert 21:00, 11 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete unsourced list -- Whpq 18:33, 13 July 2007 (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.