Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rick Sopher (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. asilvering (talk) 04:23, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rick Sopher

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)

I responded to a speedy tag this morning as G4, recreation of an article previously deleted at XfD. In the moment, I believed the sourcing similar to that when it was first deleted. After another admin disagreed I was happy to undo the G4. Now I'm asking for re-assessment of this version, since I wasn't given the opportunity to question the SIGCOV in my purely administrative tasks. I assert these sources are marginal at best, and the page creator was blocked for promotional ediitng several years ago. I have no presented reason to believe this wealthy businessman is any more notable than any other wealthy businessman. BusterD (talk) 01:30, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Finance, and United Kingdom. BusterD (talk) 01:30, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Articles are either about being one of the to hedge fund managers, where he's mentioned in a list with about 19 others, or this [1] about planting a tree in Saudi Arabia as a sign of interfaith "togetherness" for lack of a better word. I don't see sources 1 and 4 in the article as being only about this person. Rest aren't RS per Cite HIghlighter. Being one in a list of 20 and planting trees aren't quite enough for notability here. Oaktree b (talk) 04:14, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

He has been covered by Maneet Ahuja in her books and numerous reliable sources, including Reuters, the New York Post, and the Wall Street Journal. As the Chairman of LCH Investments, the world’s oldest fund of hedge funds, he is also responsible for compiling the annual list of top hedge funds. in addition, he holds distinguished positions at notable organizations like the Woolf Institute, Alliance Israélite Universelle, and the Center for Jewish History. If these credentials are not sufficient to establish notability for a hedge fund manager, then what would be? In fact, many existing Wikipedia pages on cite fewer sources than his.Jiuantaui (talk) 11:32, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
These are not particularly strong arguments. Both Oaktree b and I have read the applied sources already, and neither of us are impressed. Remember, we are discussing this pagespace, not any of that other category pagespace. BusterD (talk) 18:18, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We need sourcing about the person. You can be whatever and get an article here if you have enough sourcing. Being notable but having poor sourcing is the issue. Oaktree b (talk) 14:01, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Sourcing looks not that good. Perhaps can be expanded, though I am not sure if the subject is notable for stand alone article. Feels like an employee made this page. Ramos1990 (talk) 04:08, 8 April 2025 (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.