- 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. J04n(talk page) 00:09, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
- Assessment Fund (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This fund does not appear to pass WP:CORP, in that it has not received significant (or any) coverage from independent reliable sources. Not surprising since it is only a year old. No significant sources in the article. I did a search but it's hard, since the name is so generic. When I used the founder's name as a disambiguator I found only this article, social media, and things written by the founder. MelanieN (talk) 21:01, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. —Mikemoral♪♫ 23:21, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:36, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
- Delete for lack of coverage, fails WP:GNG, fails WP:CORP. Probably WP:TOOSOON. --Bejnar (talk) 16:08, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination and Benjar. Creation was in good faith, but we're not a linkedin for companies.--Milowent • hasspoken 13:32, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
- 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.