Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Finance

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Finance. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Finance|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Finance. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Finance/archive

Purge page cache

watch

Finance

Currensea

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable fintech startup, fails WP:NCORP. Sources are as follows:

Routine WP:ORGTRIV (capital raises, product launches, etc.) - does not establish notability under NCORP: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5].
WP:PRIMARYSOURCES: [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15].
WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS: [16], [17].
Unreliable sources: Forbes contributor (see WP:FORBESCON), deprecated source (see WP:THESUN).
Press released-based churnalism ([[18]]) and PR-driven articles in WP:TRADES publications: [19], [20].

I didn't find any other qualifying coverage in my WP:BEFORE search. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:42, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, and England. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:42, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pioneer Fund (Venture Capital Firm)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable venture capital firm. No sources I could find that satisfy general notability or NCORP, not to mention the handful of low quality ones listed in the article, which range from self-published to routine. The TechCrunch ones are about a third party and not the firm itself. PK650 (talk) 01:10, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, calling out this cited Inc. article which hails the fund as the most active investor in silicon valley, thoughts on it? BananaManCanDance (talk) 05:03, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. PK650 (talk) 01:10, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Canada, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:37, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Xperedon

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable initiative, no reliable sources or general notability. Cinder painter (talk) 11:48, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Websites and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 13:25, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all sources are from the company website, this looks like WP:PROMO Orange sticker (talk) 15:04, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:47, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - spam and the company is defunct. Brandon (talk) 08:42, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bmycharity

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable (defunct) company; no previous good and reliable media mentions found; Cinder painter (talk) 11:49, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 13:24, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no 3rd party sources. Google has a couple of mentions on Marketing Week but these are run of the mill - doesn't meet wp:gng Orange sticker (talk) 15:07, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:46, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sinitus

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Dead links mainly and no rs. New online search did not bring reliable sources; should be removed Cinder painter (talk) 11:44, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, and Switzerland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:48, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - if the company getting vaporized by regulators did not make the news, that's obviously demonstrates a total lack of notability. Brandon (talk) 08:45, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete. Forget sigcov, there is not a single source on this company whatsoever. No hits in the NZZ, nothing in the Swiss newspaper archives besides one-line mentions in advertisements [21], and the best I get from a web search amounts to database entries. [22][23] Toadspike [Talk] 14:53, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Coinme

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Very small crypto exchange, no direct sources with in-depth media coverage. Mainly press coverage on people or events somehow connected to the crypto and the company. BoraVoro (talk) 08:44, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Cryptocurrency, Finance, Companies, Technology, and Washington. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:44, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Non-notable business awards, sourcing is largely confirmation of funding or routine business activities. I don't see notability here. I can't find anything we could use either. Oaktree b (talk) 15:15, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is about all there is for RS that I found: [24], more of a consumer protection story than anything showing notability. Oaktree b (talk) 15:16, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

FXORO

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The sources are poor and unreliable; press coverage is almost nonexistent, and many citations come from the company’s own website. BoraVoro (talk) 08:46, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Cryptocurrency, Finance, Companies, and Cyprus. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:44, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Καμπάνα" €360.000 στην ΚΕΠΕΥ MCA Intelifunds από την Επιτροπή Κεφαλαιαγοράς, fined by the Commission. IgelRM (talk) 15:42, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as it stands, not yet up to WP:NCORP - David Gerard (talk) 08:31, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nordea Bank Norge

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I don't see how it passes WP:NCORP. The notability banner has remained unresolved for 12 years. Cinder painter (talk) 10:56, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, and Norway. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:42, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nordea Bank Lietuva

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I don't see how it passes WP:NCORP. Could be redirected to the Nordea page Cinder painter (talk) 10:57, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, and Lithuania. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:42, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

NBGI Private Equity

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I don't see how it passes WP:NCORP. Some pdfs, paid or profile nature references. Cinder painter (talk) 10:58, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, Greece, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:42, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tomato Bank

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I don't see how this defunct Chinese bank passes WP:NCORP. No reliable sources or significant coverage Cinder painter (talk) 11:00, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:41, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Royal Business Bank, at least partially. One of ~100 California chartered banks folding is not insignificant. Brandon (talk) 09:08, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rabitabank

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Lacking reliable sources to meet notability guidelines; the references are primarily from the bank itself. Cinder painter (talk) 11:34, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, and Azerbaijan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:40, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Millennium Bank (Greece)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable defunct bank with poor sources Cinder painter (talk) 11:36, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, and Greece. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:40, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RBC Direct Investing

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not meeting NCORP, no reliable media coverage. Taking off shortly (talk) 08:24, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, Internet, and Canada. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:45, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: literally no secondary sourcing to prove any notability. Could be talked about in existing articles on RBC. Mamani1990 (talk) 01:38, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Haddawy

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable American businessman with no WP:SIGCOV to be found. JTtheOG (talk) 20:48, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Finance, Technology, and United States of America. JTtheOG (talk) 20:48, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Crypto spam article. Nothing for notability, 40 under 40 isn't notable, nor does much of the rest help. No sourcing we can use, this is all I could find [25], a PR item. Oaktree b (talk) 22:06, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: California, Nevada, and Washington. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:12, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - a made up in one day awards for up and coming but ultimately run of the mill business person. And no, Bloomberg doesn't add to notability. Bearian (talk) 05:46, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

EBC Group

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NCORP. Sources are largely primary, republished press releases, or dubiously reliable finance sites that fail to provide sufficient coverage to meet WP:CORPDEPTH. Similar results on GNews, and ProQuest is largely some sponsorship coverage, which falls under trivial coverage. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 20:48, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and United Kingdom. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 20:48, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:10, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete does not meet NCORP. --BoraVoro (talk) 09:10, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I see one single reliable source, Yahoo Finance. If you eliminated the weasel words and stubify it, then you would be left with nothing but original research. Bearian (talk) 04:30, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The Yahoo Finance source is syndicated content, not their own. It was originally from https://www.retailbankerinternational.com/news/ebc-financial-group-debuts-on-laliga-stage-with-fc-barcelona-partnership/?cf-view ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 05:44, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

.Keep it meets WP:SUBSTANTIAL and WP:FAILCORP Troublemasher (talk) 12:49, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Inadequate depth of coverage to pass WP:CORPDEPTH. Notice of a collaboration with FC Barcelona has attracted attention but what editorial comment there is seems to replicate what the two partners say. Rupples (talk) 07:31, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mixin Network

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The crypto exchange with sources only based on 1 event - stealing of 200 mln usd. Literally all 5 sources in the References are only about the same event. Not ready for Wikipedia and not enough reliable sources to establish notability per WP CORPDEPTH 89KimberlyRoad (talk) 12:15, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Cryptocurrency, Finance, Companies, and Hong Kong. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:22, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I found this article from Arabian Business which was published before the September 2023 hack and provides a few sentences of coverage about the subject. If the consensus is against a standalone article, I support a merge/redirect to Cryptocurrency and crime#Exchanges (where Mixin is mentioned) per Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Alternatives to deletion. A redirect with the history preserved under the redirect will allow editors to selectively merge any content that can be reliably sourced to the _target article. A redirect with the history preserved under the redirect will allow the redirect to be undone if significant coverage in reliable sources is found in the future. Cunard (talk) 12:06, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge as suggested. It's sourced, but cringey without any context. Bearian (talk) 05:02, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Flow-through share

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Orphan (except for link from DAB), no refs, notability not established Laterthanyouthink (talk) 08:52, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance and Canada. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:57, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Enough coverage in books and research studies to pass WP:GNG: [26], [27], [28], [29], [30] (the studies can be accessed through the Wikipedia Library) Helpful Raccoon (talk) 10:00, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:48, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shalabh Gupta

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails to meet WP:GNG and WP:NBLP.
Sources provided (in order):

(1): Business Daily: A puff piece on the subject, who seems to be being interviewed for this; not an independent source.
(2): Mifeed: The title says “Blazing Trails In Biotech”, need I say more? Same as above. Published in the same week as the above source and another puff piece on the subject, who seems to be being interviewed for this; not an independent source.
(3): Company website: Primary source, as this is the company's own site. Self-published content.
(4): LA Harbor News: I am unable to visit the site and therefore cannot vet this. My browser tells me this is an unsafe site. Visit at your own direction.
(5): Founders Network: This is another primary source, as it is self-published. Details are taken from an event hosted via EventBrite here.

Nyxion³⁰³ 💬 Talk 00:32, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Nyxion³⁰³ 💬 Talk 00:32, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Finance, Medicine, Technology, Uttar Pradesh, California, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:47, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

- Thank you for your feedback on this. Is the main issue with the sources? I'll look for some more. What do you think about the article itself? I think he's an interesting subject. When I saw that he was the first person to work on Wall Street and being a physician at the same time, he caught my attention. I thought that might count as noteworthy and interesting enough to be included in the encyclopedia. Thanks SilverhairedHarry (talk) 17:51, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  Hi, thank you for replying on here. The sources are, of course, a huge concern as they fail to meet WP:RS. The individual mentioned in the article also fails to meet WP:GNG and WP:NBLP, I was unable to find anything online that we can consider notable. Being a physician on Wall St. wouldn't inherently make him notable, unfortunately. Nyxion³⁰³ 💬 Talk 19:41, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. We need more participation, source assessment and arguments for what should happen with this article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:09, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OpenCoffee Club

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. Insufficient independent in-depth sources to establish notability. Imcdc Contact 03:21, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Organizations, Companies, and United Kingdom. Imcdc Contact 03:21, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:20, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Can't find anything for notability. There are a lot of trivial mentions to local clubs. The best sources with significant coverage I could find include: Local news source where the reporter has a conflict of interest (went to a meeting about a startup funded by her organization). Masters thesis, not reliable per WP:SCHOLARSHIP. readwrite.com article, a website that appears to have little to no editorial oversight. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 06:52, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I can't find the WP:SIGCOV for the WP:GNG to be met here. Let'srun (talk) 03:05, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:29, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: informal networking meetings over coffee are about as routine an activity as you can get, nothing about this stands out as notable. I'm going to get a coffee after making this comment, not going to write an article about DnB's Morning Brew. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 06:53, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Putra Adhiguna

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I am unable to find any independent coverage of this BLP. The 15 sources cited in the article are author listings, biography listings, interviews, articles written by the subject, alumni listings, coverage from events, seminars, conferences, summits and more interviews. It is unclear what makes the subject notable or what their contributions are which could be used to assess whether any SNG is met. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 14:57, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Finance, Economics, Technology, Asia, and Indonesia. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 14:57, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. No WP:SIGCOV in the sources. ~Darth Stabro^{Talk • Contribs} 23:39, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear editor, this below is planned to be add to outline his contribution to the energy transition field. Look forward to your advice whether this will be sufficiently relevant. Thank you.

Putra has made notable contributions to research on Southeast Asia's energy transition. His research expertise spans various aspects of the energy transition, including in outlining the key enablers and challenges for Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) technology application (1), critical transition minerals sourcing and related industrial developments (2), as well as key factors to drive Indonesia’s energy transition (3)(4).

His perspectives on the energy sector have been regularly featured in major news outlets in the region, covering wide-ranging topics in energy such as gas investments in Southeast Asia (5), Singapore’s clean energy imports (6), and regional green energy cooperation in ASEAN (7).

His research works have also been cited in publications such as the International Energy Agency (IEA) report on Enhancing Indonesia’s Power System (8), RAND Corporation report on China’s Role in the Global Development of Critical Resources (9) and an article in Communications Earth & Environment journal (A part of Nature journal) titled The viability of co-firing biomass waste to mitigate coal plant emissions in Indonesia (10)

He was part of the team of international peer reviewers for the IEA report titled An Energy Sector Roadmap to Net Zero Emissions in Indonesia (11) and his insights and contribution has been acknowledged in International Institute for Sustainable Development publication titled Boom and Bust: The fiscal implications of fossil fuel phase-out in six large emerging economies (12)

(1) https://ieefa.org/resources/carbon-capture-southeast-asian-market-context-sorting-out-myths-and-realities-cost

(2) https://energyshift.institute/work/0-4-of-global-battery-production-capacity-indonesias-battery-and-ev-developments-are-far-out-of-step-with-its-nickel-exploitation-promise/

(3) https://ieefa.org/resources/indonesia-wants-go-greener-pln-stuck-excess-capacity-coal-fired-power-plants

(4) https://ieefa.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Indonesias-Biomass-Cofiring-Bet_February-2021.pdf

(5) https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/se-asia/gas-investments-in-se-asia-undermine-green-energy-climate-push-report

(6) https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/st-explains-s-pore-announced-more-ambitious-clean-import-_targets-what-would-this-mean-for-our-energy-transition

(7) https://www.chinadailyhk.com/hk/article/583121

(8) https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/247b5328-2cd7-4fbb-a800-dd1c71f6e562/EnhancingIndonesiasPowerSystem.pdf

(9) https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RRA2000/RRA2096-1/RAND_RRA2096-1.pdf

(10) https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-024-01588-0

(11) https://www.iea.org/reports/an-energy-sector-roadmap-to-net-zero-emissions-in-indonesia

(12) https://www.iisd.org/system/files/2022-07/fossil-fuel-phase-out-briics-economies.pdf

**Viewpoints and research

*Carbon Capture and Storage*

Putra’s view on Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) technology is that it will not be easily deployed in cost-sensitive regions such as Southeast Asia (13). However, more affluent countries, such as Singapore or Japan, might be interested in exporting their carbon dioxide emissions to countries that can provide storage locations (14). Nevertheless, he advocated that such export activities will require stringent standards with clear long term liability agreements (15) (16).

(13) https://ieefa.org/articles/widespread-adoption-carbon-capture-utilization-and-storage-technologies-south-east-asia

(14) https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/singapore-japan-sign-agreement-to-collaborate-on-carbon-capture-and-storage-tech

(15) https://asia.nikkei.com/Opinion/Japan-cannot-make-CO2-disappear-just-by-exporting-it

(16) https://www.thejakartapost.com/business/2024/05/27/new-rules-set-to-kick-start-japanese-co2-exports-to-ri.html

*Critical Minerals for the Energy Transition*

His research on critical minerals primarily focused on nickel development and the battery and electric vehicle industry (2). He has advocated for more ambitious industrial developments to further enhance the role of producing countries in the battery and electric vehicle value chain (2).

Putra has also raised significant concerns about the low social and environmental standards of nickel development in Indonesia, including its implications for indigenous populations (17) and the potential use of forced labour (18). He has urged the government to conduct transparent assessments and implement improvements in these areas, as he outlined in his interviews with BBC News and Voice of America (17) (18).

(17) https://www.bbc.com/indonesia/articles/c1e5x2k7kp8o

(18) https://www.voaindonesia.com/a/amerika-serikat-masukkan-nikel-indonesia-ke-daftar-pekerja-paksa-/7816453.html

His expertise on critical minerals in Southeast Asia is evident from his interviews featured in prominent international publications such as The New York Times (19), Barron’s (20), NPR (21), The Straits Times (22), Channel News Asia (23) and Bloomberg news (24)

(19) https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/18/business/indonesia-nickel-china-us.html

(20) https://www.barrons.com/news/indonesia-bets-on-se-asia-s-first-battery-plant-to-become-ev-hub-8328fe72

(21) https://www.npr.org/2024/02/13/1231061492/a-leading-candidate-for-president-in-indonesia-wants-the-country-to-increase-coa

(22) https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/se-asia/indonesia-set-to-become-ev-battery-battleground

(23) https://www.channelnewsasia.com/watch/indonesias-industrialisation-has-fallen-short-its-regional-peers-analyst-4122381

(24) https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/business/international/2024/10/17/indonesias-fixer-in-chief-bows-out-as-prabowo-takes-the-helm/

*Trump election, China and Southeast Asia’s Energy Transition*

With the recent election of Trump as President of the United States, Putra has shared his views on its impact toward the Southeast Asia’s energy transition in Asia's prominent news outlet, Nikkei Asia. According to him, Trump's withdrawal from international climate agreements will have a notable impact on climate diplomacy in Southeast Asia's energy transition, although its effect on energy investments in the region will likely remain limited. (25)

In separate publications featured in China's major news outlets, Caixin and China Daily, he argued that Trump's rise to power would likely create a larger role for China in Southeast Asia's energy transition (26) (27). Major Southeast Asian countries, such as Indonesia, stand to benefit significantly from increased engagement with China due to its capacity for rapid investment deployment. However, raising the standards of Chinese overseas investments remains essential. (27) Prior, he has also commented on Xinhua News how China’s coal provinces and their rapid industrial development toward clean energy can also provide inspirations for coal reliant economies to transition to greener industries (28)

(25) https://asia.nikkei.com/Opinion/How-Trump-might-shake-up-Southeast-Asia-s-clean-energy-transition

(26) https://www.caixinglobal.com/2024-12-06/commentary-will-a-trump-presidency-give-china-a-bigger-role-in-southeast-asias-energy-transition-102265317.html

(27) https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202412/10/WS67579329a310f1265a1d1fb0.html

(28) https://english.news.cn/20240917/b74ec11d54c244978a5b866ba286716f/c.html

*Indonesia’s energy Transition*

Putra has also been a notable voice in outlining the key enablers and challenges in Indonesia’s energy transition. This includes highlighting the considerations for the use of biomass to generate electricity on Reuters (29) and International Monetary Fund Finance & Development Magazine (30). He has also shared his views on Indonesia’s role in the climate and energy transition in international events held by the University of Maryland (31) in College Park and United States - Indonesia Society in Washington DC (32).

His views on the use of biomass and nuclear energy in Indonesia has been featured in Channel News Asia’s feature documentary titled “Power to the People – Bioenergy” (33) and “Insight - Will Indonesia Go Nuclear” (34).

His work while at IEEFA covering the plan for the use of Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) for Indonesia’s power generation (35) has been cited by Indonesia’s Corruption Eradication Commission report on its Corruption Vulnerability Assessment (Kajian kerentanan korupsi) (36).

He has also advocated the need to transition to greener energy in the islands of the archipelago, as outlined in an Associated Press article (34). Putra has also emphasized the need to optimize international assistance such as the $20 billion funding by U.S. and its allies (35) and anticipate energy consumption growth and emissions in new sectors such as the data centres (36).

(29) https://www.reuters.com/article/business/energy/feature-betting-on-bamboo-indonesian-villages-struggle-to-source-safe-green-po-idUSL8N2LU4I6/

(30) https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/fandd/issues/2022/12/country-case-indonesia-solar-future-jacques

(31) https://cgs.umd.edu/events/indonesias-climate-future-land-energy-and-governance-open-forum-discussion

(32) https://usindo.org/feature/special-open-forum-discussion-on-indonesias-climate-future-land-energy-and-governance/

(33) https://www.channelnewsasia.com/watch/power-people/bioenergy-4439271

(34) https://www.channelnewsasia.com/watch/insight-2022-2023/will-indonesia-go-nuclear-3029031

(35) https://www.kpk.go.id/id/publikasi-data/kajian/kerentanan-korupsi-program-gasifikasi-pembangkit-listrik-pt-pln

(36) https://apnews.com/article/business-indonesia-g-20-summit-bali-climate-and-environment-a73dcbcb60d9a42904f7d81025b5feac

(37) https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-allies-announce-20-billion-package-to-wean-indonesia-off-coal-11668503675

(38) https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/economics/article/3235499/dark-clouds-ahead-indonesias-emissions-surge-asias-need-data-centres-singapores-offshore-push 222.124.125.10 (talk) 06:52, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. It would be nice to see at least a partial review of these newly found sources.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:34, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep I think they might meet criteria 7 of WP:NPROF. NPROF applies to anyone involved in scholarly research, so I think Adhiguna's roles at policy research think tanks qualify them to be considered under NPROF. Criteria 7 is that the subject must have "had a substantial impact outside academia in their academic capacity", and it notes that being "frequently quoted in conventional media as an academic expert" may qualify. Adhiguna is clearly very widely quoted as an expert on the Indonesian energy transition, including in publications like the NYT, BBC and WSJ. They also seem to have had a significant impact outside of academia by using their scholarly research to inform Indonesian policymaking, including contributing to some influential reports like the IEA one and being a regular columnist on the energy transition for one of Indonesia's largest newspapers. I agree that they definitely don't meet WP:GNG, but I think they make a reasonable case under criteria 7 of WP:NPROF as an influential subject-matter expert. MCE89 (talk) 00:16, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Can you please list their 'substantial impact' and explain how they are 'very widely quoted as an expert' after you have actually read the articles from the NYT, BBC and WSJ? Also, please clarify how you determined that these quotes have meaningful impact? I believe they are merely routine/run of the mill statements. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 04:51, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I did read the articles. I'm not sure what you mean by routine/run of the mill statements - they are pretty clearly being quoted by each of these publications in their capacity as a subject matter expert, which is exactly what is described under 7(a) of WP:NPROF. As I said, I'm not claiming that any of these articles constitute SIGCOV or that the subject meets WP:GNG, but as someone engaged in "scholarly research" all that needs to be established is that they meet one of the seven criteria under NPROF. I think the most applicable criteria is that they have "had a substantial impact outside academia in their academic capacity", which may be satisfied if they are "frequently quoted in conventional media as an academic expert in a particular area" (note "quoted" - I'm aware that they are not a major focus of any of the articles, but they are certainly widely quoted as an expert on the Indonesian energy transition). So the reason I think they meet criteria 7 is that (a) they have been widely quoted in prominent international media outlets, including the WSJ, NYT, BBC, Reuters etc., as an expert in their area of research, satisfying 7(a) of NPROF, and (b) they have clearly influenced Indonesian policymaking in their area of research, as demonstrated by being cited or consulted on various government projects and publications. MCE89 (talk) 05:36, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
So, TLDR: you actually don’t have anything meaningful or substantial to show from the NYT, BBC or WSJ articles? Instead, you’ve decided to explain NPROF#7 to me. Fascinating, but I’m still waiting for evidence of this so called ‘significant impact’.

Let's take the NYT example: Putra Adhiguna says “One way or another, Europe and the U.S. will need Indonesia nickel" and "They should be coming to this country figuring out how they can do it better." This is just a routine interview byte as he was part of Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis.. They almost always comment on everything and that’s why this falls under routine coverage.

The entire article reads like a collection of his viewpoints and arguments - Putra Adhiguna emphasized this, Putra Adhiguna shared his views on that, Putra Adhiguna argued this, Putra Adhiguna commented on that - just a series of views, emphasizes, comments and arguments. Yet, there’s nothing about the work he has done or his achievements, because there aren’t any. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 07:33, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe tone it down a bit? My point was just that all of those articles are very standard examples of what it looks like when an expert in a particular field is quoted in the mainstream press about their area of expertise, which is exactly what 7(a) describes. Yes, it's a routine interview bite, but that's what "quoted in conventional media as an academic expert" is describing. I'm not claiming that any of these sources are SIGCOV of Putra Adhiguna, but that's not what's required - NPROF specifically says that researchers may be "notably influential in the world of ideas without their biographies being the subject of secondary sources". It seems like you're applying the GNG standard and asking for secondary SIGCOV of the work he has done and his achievements, but I don't think NPROF requires that at all. What I'm saying is that the fact that he is a public-facing expert who frequently comments in the international press, writes for major Indonesian newspapers and seems to have some measurable influence on policymaking processes in Indonesia is enough to show that he is "notably influential in the world of ideas" per NPROF, even without the secondary SIGCOV that would be needed to meet GNG.

We're in agreement about the absence of SIGCOV though and I don't think this is particularly productive, so let's maybe leave it there? MCE89 (talk) 08:53, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Without concrete examples of specific policies shaped by his work or recognition within academic or policy circles, it’s hard to see how his routine media mentions meet the bar set by NPROF. It seems more like he was quoted in conventional media as a person working for the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis rather than as an academic expert. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 09:31, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I can't evaluate the wall of text and citation dump, but I can see very clearly that the subject badly fails WP:PROF: he lacks any engineering, teaching, education, or scientific degree – as well as an earned doctorate of any kind. He has never published or even written any peer-reviewed articles. He is a basically a talking head. For that, he should be evaluated using WP:SIGCOV. Bearian (talk) 00:39, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Many resources are not related to the subject of this biography article. Even more do not discuss this subject. More citations/resources needed that discuss this subject significantly. I'm agree with the nominator talk about this article. Ariandi Lie ^{Let's talk} 04:16, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Hopefully with some more time some further ability to consider the sources presented can be made.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:33, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

weak keep: In addition to the quotes above, appears to be a semi-regular columnist in the Jakarta Post on energy issues. I think we can have a !weak keep for the PROF as explained aobve. Oaktree b (talk) 03:01, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Sorry, here [31] and [32]. Oaktree b (talk) 03:02, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Advanced Technology Development Center

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NCORP. Insufficient independent in-depth sources to establish notability. Imcdc Contact 02:07, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Organizations, Companies, United States of America, and Georgia (U.S. state). Imcdc Contact 02:07, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 02:08, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep: I found two independent sources ([33], [34]) and added them to the article, but I'm not sure about reliability and the first one seems pretty promotional. I'd be more confident if someone could find another piece of coverage that isn't connected to the ATDC or Georgia Tech. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 14:04, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'd like to try another relisting before considering closing this discussion as No consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:02, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

August Capital

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NCORP. Insufficient independent in-depth sources to establish notability. Tagged for multiple issues. Was previously deleted per AFD. Imcdc Contact 03:43, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Organizations, Companies, United States of America, and California. Imcdc Contact 03:43, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fail to meet WP:GNG (WP:NORG and WP:SIRS). QEnigma talk 16:02, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previously brought to AFD so not eligible for a Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:38, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Tons of coverage that goes back to before the millennium. There's more than a dozen articles in the Wall Steet Journal which detail deals made: [35], [36], [37]. There's New York Times coverage as well: [38], [39], [40], [41]. Plenty more sources out there. This is just from a few minutes search. Thriley (talk) 06:19, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:CORPDEPTH. These are funding announcements (1+2+4+5), brief hiring news (3) and a brief mention (6+7). These would be considered routine trivial coverage. Could be just regurgitation of press releases. No considered in depth enough to fulfill WP:ORGCRIT. The requirements for WP:NCORP are a lot more stringent now and simply having a bit of coverage is not enough to prove notability. Imcdc Contact 06:28, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Did you really spend more than a few minutes looking into potential sourcing? Thriley (talk) 06:33, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's the type of coverage that is expected for a firm like this one. It demonstrates that billions of dollars has passed through it over the last 30 years. Thriley (talk) 16:26, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Cielquiparle: You added a source from Fortune to the article . Are you seeing the widespread coverage I am seeing? Thriley (talk) 16:30, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

While a firm with a large AUM is expected to be notable, it is the independent in-depth sources that determine notability per WP:NCORP. Just saying an investment firm has raised XXX amount alone is considered routine since they all need to do that since how else are they going to get money to invest? Speaking of AUM, August Capital has supposedly $1.3B to $2B AUM. Meanwhile BOND has $6B AUM and Accel-KKR has over $20B AUM and they both got deleted. Imcdc Contact 17:06, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, a source assessment, especially of newly found sources, would be helpful as there is no consensus here yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:35, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The sources listed provide only routine coverage, including the one from the Wall Street Journal. Aona1212 (talk) 03:20, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
1. Fund, Bret R.; Pollock, Timothy G.; Baker, Ted; Wowak, Adam J. (2008). "Who's the New Kid? The Process of Developing Centrality in Venture Capitalist Deal Networks". In Baum, Joel A. C.; Rowley, Timothy J. (eds.). Network Strategy. Advances in Strategic Management. Vol. 25. Leeds: Emerald Group Publishing. pp. 563–593. doi:10.1016/S0742-3322(08)25016-3. ISBN 978-0-7623-1442-3. ISSN 0742-3322. Retrieved 2025-01-05.
  The book notes on page 566: "We then introduce our process model of centrality achievement and summarize the history and evolution of two venture capital firms – Benchmark Capital and August Capital – to illustrate the elements and relationships in our model."
  The book notes on page 574: "August Capital (August) was founded by partners David Marquardt and John Johnston, two former partners of TVI whose early stage investment experience prior to founding August included investments in Microsoft, Adaptec, Compaq, Sun Microsystems, Seagate, Intuit, Sybase, Visio, Actel, and ViewLogic. David Marquardt is a prominent and high-status member of the VC community; he was a co-founder of TVI and the lead VC for the Microsoft deal. To this day he continues to serve on Microsoft’s board."
  The book notes on pages 574–575: "In the simplest terms, August seemed to take its time, moving at a very deliberate pace. In the several months following the close of its inaugural fund, August made only one small investment for about $1 million (representing approximately 1% of its total fund). Our reading of a variety of contemporary descriptions of August’s behavior and our examination of their investment behavior suggests the self-confident manner of a ‘‘master of the universe’’ that felt little urgency or compulsion to hurry in making investments and putting the new firm on the map."
  The book notes on page 572: "As the two firms entered their second year, August continued its more conservative approach and made no additional investments in the first three months of 1996. It appeared, rather, that the August partners continued to work with ventures they knew from their TVI days but in which August had not yet made investments. Finally, in April of 1996, August invested along with six other VC firms in Be, Inc., a company that TVI originally funded in 1992."
  The book notes on page 584: "August’s first two funds (with a combined total of $300 million) were fully invested in 34 companies by 1999. Overall, August invested in 44 companies from 1995 to 2000 with an average investment of $6.8 million. Among these companies were big names such as Epinions.com, Cobalt Networks, and Be, Inc. As Fig. 5 shows, during our period of study seven of August’s investments underwent initial public offerings (IPOs). The median return for the seven firms that August took public was 585%. Their two most successful IPOs during this period were Cobalt Networks and Silicon Image. August’s investment of $10 million in Cobalt Networks was worth $336 million at the end of the day Cobalt went public – a 3,360% return. Silicon Image was similarly successful; August’s $8.3 million investment in this firm was worth $119 million after the first day of trading, generating a 1,444% return."
2. Primack, Dan (2019-01-02). "A look inside the trouble at Silicon Valley's August Capital". Axios. Archived from the original on 2024-12-30. Retrieved 2025-01-05.
  The article notes: "Silicon Valley venture firm August Capital held its annual holiday dinner on Dec. 6. The mood was festive, not only because of the season, but also because August had recently held a first close on its eighth fund after an unusually arduous process. Four days later, the firm effectively imploded. ... Background: August Capital was founded in 1995 by investors who had written some of the earliest checks for tech icons like Microsoft and Compaq. ... August was so successful for so long that it never really had to fundraise in the traditional sense. Instead, it could just send out an email to investors and hold a quick close. But that changed in 2018 with its efforts to secure $250 million for Fund VIII. Some LPs were still upset with how fees were handled on August's under-performing sixth fund, while others were curious about partnership stability given that two longtime GPs (Howard Hartenbaum and Vivek Mehra) were out and 2 newer GPs (Tripp Jones and Villi Iltchev) were in."
3. Roberts, Bill (May 2000). "The chip-friendly VCs". Electronic Business. Vol. 26, no. 5. Reed Business Information. pp. 72–82. ProQuest 194235753.
  The article notes: "August Capital may be the best kept secret in Silicon Valley. It was cofounded in August (hence the name) 1995 by Marquardt, a Silicon Valley legend and the only VC who invested in Microsoft Corp. 19 years ago. It now has three funds totaling nearly $700 million, with more than $1.5 billion in assets under management. ... Rappaport joined the firm in 1996. The other general partners are John Johnston, the other cofounder and a former partner at Technology Venture Investors (TVI), also in Menlo Park, and Andrew Anker, who was co-founder and CEO of Wired Digital Inc., San Francisco, a news and media organization that launched the first advertising Web site. Mark Wilson, administrative partner, and Won Chung, research partner, round out the senior team.August Capital thrives on early stage funding, preferably as lead investor, in companies like Genoa that seek to fundamentally change their industry. ... August Capital's only disaster was DigiCash, which was developing infrastructure for electronic payments over the Internet. ... It entered Chapter 11 in late 1998 and emerged in 1999 as eCash Technologies Inc., Seattle."
4. Primack, Dan (2014-09-26). "Exclusive: August Capital leaving "opportunity" on the table". Fortune. Archived from the original on 2025-01-05. Retrieved 2025-01-05.
  The article notes about "“opportunities funds": "But Fortune has learned that one of the practice’s originators, August Capital, is going in the other direction. Back in 2000, August took advantage of an opportunity to participate in a $2 billion buyout for hard-drive maker Seagate. The only problem was that its commitment took up around one-third of its fund, which is an exceptionally high percentage. So August later decided to begin raising $250 million side vehicles to handle such deals, and has done so for each of its last three fundraises (no fees are charged on the side-funds until capital is called). But when August returns to market later this year to raise its sixth fund, there will be no sidecar."
5. Garland, Russ (March 2015). "VC Profile: August Capital Shifts to Single-Fund Model to Maintain Its Focus on Value Investing". Private Equity Analyst. Archived from the original on 2025-01-05. Retrieved 2025-01-05 – via ProQuest.
  The article notes: "Although some venture firms have turned to side funds to make large, growth-oriented investments, August Capital has gone in the opposite direction.The early-stage venture firm, which participated in the 2000 buyout of Seagate Technology LLC, had raised a special opportunity fund as a companion to each of its prior three funds. With its latest, $450 million pool, however, it returned to a single-fund approach. ... The Seagate investment was the catalyst for August's first special opportunity fund. That deal wasn't a natural for what is primarily an early-stage venture firm."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow August Capital to pass Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Primary criteria, which requires "significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 09:34, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. Thriley (talk) 19:43, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep; meets WP:NCORP via the sources identified by Cunard. Another source is this 3000+ word profile:

Rao, Leena (2014-06-14). "Sand Hill Road's Consiglieres: August Capital". TechCrunch. Retrieved 2025-01-05.

Jfire (talk) 21:12, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]