Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sydney Seed Fund

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. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 13:33, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sydney Seed Fund[edit]

[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)

A directory-like listing for an unremarkable venture capital fund. Significant RS coverage not found. What comes up is routine notices, passing mentions and / or WP:SPIP. Does not meet WP:NCORP. Created by Special:Contributions/Ckevinliu with few other contributions outside this topic and a history of what appears to be promotional editing. Please also see [1] to which I did not receive a response. K.e.coffman (talk) 02:31, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 02:44, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 02:44, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment—I've found one article by the Sydney Morning Herald that covers the company in depth. If more sources could be found, then it may pass WP:NCORP.— Alpha3031 (t • c) 04:47, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:01, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. — Alpha3031 (t • c) 06:17, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - $1.8 million in investments is a laughably low amount in the VC industry. The Sydney Morning Herald article is just an interview so should be considered a reliable source. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 15:05, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and per Smallbones. There's no evidence of notability here, not least as the fund appears to be very small. Nick-D (talk) 08:00, 12 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Agree with nom, topic fails GNG and WP:NCORP. References are based on company announcements or are mentions only. HighKing⁺⁺ 20:01, 12 August 2018 (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.