Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/JMI Equity

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. Daniel (talk) 00:48, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

JMI Equity[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)

I am unable to locate any references that meet the criteria for establishing notability as per WP:NCORP. All I can find are references based entirely on company announcements or inclusion in lists with a bare description. HighKing⁺⁺ 14:47, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Out of six references cited, three are their own website while reference #3 is a 404. Sourcing inadequate outside routine funding announcements which do not contribute to WP:NCORP. Umakant Bhalerao (talk) 15:03, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:13, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maryland-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:18, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:18, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:18, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep A Google news search turns up many, many articles about the company, the last being a Wall Street Journal article published in the last day. May need to be updated, but would seem to be notable. Oaktree b (talk) 16:56, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Oaktree b, Just a note that I added that WSJ source to the article. TJMSmith (talk) 17:08, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Response the quantity of references isn't a factor, but the quality. Please read our guidelines for corporations/organizations, especially WP:CORPDEPTH and WP:ORGIND. For example, the WSJ reference relies on information provided by an affiliated "investment analyst", fails ORGIND. HighKing⁺⁺ 12:23, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 13:26, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Routine coverage regrading funding, rest other sources are of their own site. Even on searching I can't find on internet.
Delete per WP:NCORP, particularly pointing at WP:ORGIND, in agreement with HighKing's assessment of the WSJ source. — Alalch Emis (talk) 20:26, 11 March 2021 (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.