Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Emerging Crowd (2nd nomination)

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:31, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Emerging Crowd[edit]

AfDs for this article:

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Apparently defunct, this company is lacking "significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject" required per WP:ORGCRIT. Hard to even find sources as to what happened to them. AusLondonder (talk) 16:14, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, and United Kingdom. AusLondonder (talk) 16:14, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I can't pull up the links as suggested are in the HuffPost. I don't find anything about this company. Last AfD was basically "it looks notable with lots of hits in Google, must be important"... Different times in wiki then. Oaktree b (talk) 17:40, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:30, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep EC is a part of crowdfunding history; worthless to take this article down.Emphasis01 (talk) 06:53, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We need sources to demonstrate that, can't just say WP:ITSIMPORTANT AusLondonder (talk) 07:43, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: An article on one of the many investment crowdfunding platforms set up a decade ago; the Equity_crowdfunding#United_Kingdom section contains a summary of those which had noteworthy features. Regarding this one, the previous AfD seems to have been swayed by the existence of initial coverage - without which publicity any such start-up would fail in a short time. Looking at Wayback Machine, this platform appears to have offered a couple of investments during 2015-16, after which it is replaced by a "There's nothing here, yet." notice and then domain for sale. (I have added a link to their Companies House history and strike-off to the article.) I don't find their original proposition to focus "on unlisted growth-stage companies in frontier and emerging markets" persuasive as a specific claim worth adding to the Equity Crowdfunding article (e.g.as WP:ATD), nor do I see coverage which surpasses trivial coverage. Fails WP:NCORP. AllyD (talk) 09:13, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.