Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RiskVal


 * 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. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 06:15, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

RiskVal

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Negligible evidence of notability. In a WP:BEFORE, I can find only the one RS listed, and the rest is press releases and passing mentions. Article appears to have been created and maintained by promotional SPAs and IPs. Declined PROD, though the decliner did nothing to address the problems. David Gerard (talk) 14:56, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. David Gerard (talk) 14:57, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. David Gerard (talk) 14:57, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete - The only thing I saw that might have met the criteria under WP:CORP in terms of coverage was this article mentioning that this firm won an industry award in China in China Times (the Taiwan paper) which is an RS, however the award does not appear to be particularly prestigious (10 firms are awarded it in Taiwan every year) and the article does not discuss this firm in much detail. As such, fails WP:CORP and WP:GNG. FOARP (talk) 15:50, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep—as a private firm, the amount and quality of information available is substantially less than for public behemoths. That being said, this does seem to be a significant firm in a very niche area, and it typically adds value to partnerships rather than striking gold on its own (based on reviewing the citations available from the article).  In regard to the comment from  about the obscure Chinese industry award, I've added a note about the firm unseating Bloomberg in the portfolio management systems category for The Waters Rankings awards.  In regard to the article as a whole, I've done copyediting and expansion of citations, and added one related to the release of a trading platform with Quantitative Brokers (which itself does not have an article here).  Regards --User:Ceyockey ( talk to me ) 02:28, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
 * It's now flooded with primary sources and non-RSes (that "Bloomberg" source is literally an advertising press release, for example). Is there any genuine third-party coverage, demonstrating that RiskVal is actually notable out in the real world? - David Gerard (talk) 07:49, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete: A simple search on Bing shows a complete absence of any press in major publications. Carajou (talk) 19:08, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- RoySmith (talk) 01:28, 13 October 2019 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26  (spin me / revolutions) 02:39, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete I am unable to locate any significant coverage with in-depth information on the company and containing independent content, fails GNG.  HighKing++ 16:47, 22 October 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.