Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thomas Schumann 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. Disregarding paid editor input.  Sandstein  18:45, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Thomas Schumann Capital

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Borderline G11 promotional article for a non notable organization that lacks in-depth significant coverage in reliable sources independent of them hence doesn’t satisfy WP:ORG. A before search reveals hits in user generated sources & sponsored posts/ mere announcements. Celestina007 (talk) 16:18, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 16:18, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 16:18, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 16:18, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 16:18, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Delaware-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 16:18, 8 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete and salt as a G11/WP:NCORP fail. I tagged it as a G11 yesterday, and it was deleted. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 16:25, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
 * @, Situations such as this could be very frustrating, a good thing I opened this AFD, so in future a G4 would come in handy. Celestina007 (talk) 16:31, 8 October 2020 (UTC)


 * I re-wrote the article to remove promotional content and add more reputable sources. I am happy to edit further if needed, but I would really appreciate this article not being deleted as this is a noteworthy company in the impact investing/sustainable finance space. Russell5495 (talk) 16:58, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Examples of significant, independent, reliable, and secondary sources in article in support of company notability:
 * Wealth & Finance International
 * International Investment
 * Business Insider
 * wealthadviser Russell5495 (talk) 17:21, 8 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment on References Clearly no attention has been paid to WP:ORGIND as all of those references are based on PR and/or Company Announcements. This from Wealth & Finance is a press release. This from International Investment doesn't discuss the company, only the fund that was launched, fails WP:CORPDEPTH. It was also entirely based on this announcement from the company. This from Business Insider is a Press Release. This from Wealth Advisor is discussing the same water fund as the Internation Investment reference above and fails for the same reasons.  HighKing++ 18:39, 15 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment I would be remiss if I didn't point out that is being paid by Thomas Schumann Capital to advocate for this article's continued existence. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 17:38, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I was paid for my original contributions, yes, but all re-writes and advocating have been unpaid and on my own time because I personally think that it is a valid article. Russell5495 (talk) 18:18, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete: Article does not meet GNG or NCORP. No direct and indepth SIGCOV from IS RS.  // Timothy ::  talk  03:04, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete Not a single reference meets the criteria for establishing notability. Topic fails GNG/NCORP.  HighKing++ 18:39, 15 October 2020 (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.