Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reichmuth & Co


 * 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. (Non-administrator closure.) Northamerica1000(talk) 06:29, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Reichmuth & Co

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:CORP. None of the references have in depth coverage on the bank. There are many references on the web to this, but all are related to a single event, the shenanigans around Bernard Madoff; or are passing mentions. There are some press releases and interviews with company officers but they aren't independent. Stuartyeates (talk) 01:53, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Switzerland-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:05, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:05, 24 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep. Clearly meets GNG.  The assertions in the nomination are incorrect.  There are a number of articles (albeit primarily in languages other than English) devoted to coverage of the bank,  that are far more than passing mentions. Many of the references do not relate to the series of events concerning the investment in Madoff, the loss, and subsequent events relating thereto.  Plus, this is the first private bank created in Switzerland in 80 years, one of only 12 Swiss unlimited liability banks, and referred to in the RSs as a prominent major player among Swiss hedge funds.  It has billions of dollars of assets under management -- even post-Madoff.  Despite the famed Swiss private bank code of secrecy, more than enough has been written on this bank.  Clearly notable.--Epeefleche (talk) 19:56, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Michaelzeng7 (talk) 01:29, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 00:40, 8 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep Appears to be somewhat notable per guidelines. Candleabracadabra (talk) 16:24, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep major internationally known bank.&#39;DGG (at NYPL) (talk) 18:54, 8 July 2013 (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.