Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Palamon Capital Partners

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!} 23:10, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Palamon Capital Partners

[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)

nonnoitable private equity firm - Altenmann >talk 23:21, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:36, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Non notable corporation with no sources except that they bought another company. Wikipedia is not a directory or catalog of every business. I do complement the article's author, however. They did a wonderful job in formatting. Bluefist^talk 02:16, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - no assertion of notability. Most holding companies are not automatically notable because of their assets; see WP:NCORP and WP:NOTINHERITED. If information about why it’s notable is added, then it would be notable. Bearian (talk) 01:47, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I agree that the notability is not inhereited from the companies it has purchased or taken stakes in. However, I do see coverage from the Financial Times that seems to have a bit of depth into how the firm operates and goes beyond merely reporting transactions. I am also seeing a metric ton of coverage from The Wall Street Journal about this firm and its activities, though much of it is transaction reporting. My hunch is that this firm is probably notable, but it's a bit hard for me to prove until I have more time to do a source dive. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 03:56, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- You may request to WP:DRAFTIFY of WP:USERFY it and work at your pace if you have an interest. - Altenmann >talk 04:17, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is a company therefore GNG/WP:NCORP requires at least two deep or significant sources with each source containing "Independent Content" showing in-depth information *on the company*. "Independent content", in order to count towards establishing notability, must include original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject. I'm unable to identify any references that meet the criteria for establishing notability, the sourcing to date all relies entirely on information provided by the company therefore there no in-depth "Independent Content" about the company. HighKing⁺⁺ 17:44, 30 July 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.