![]() | This discussion was subject to a
deletion review on 2020 October 15. For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review. |
The result was no consensus. Stifle ( talk) 13:42, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
WP:PROMO: Content made for Advertising, marketing, or public relations purposes. A spinoff VC firm cannot have the notability of it mother company. Qualifies for WP:TOOSOON. Calling for an AfD discussion. Hatchens ( talk) 10:15, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
Source assessment table:
| ||||
Source | Independent? | Reliable? | Significant coverage? | Count source toward GNG? |
---|---|---|---|---|
https://www.livemint.com/companies/news/chiratae-eyes-first-close-of-150-million-for-latest-india-focused-fund-1568221688692.html | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✔ Yes |
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/small-biz/startups/newsbuzz/chiratae-ventures-out-with-a-fresh-seed-fund-of-35-million-for-new-bets/articleshow/71177877.cms | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✔ Yes |
https://www.thehindu.com/business/Industry/idg-ventures-india-re-brands-to-chiratae-ventures/article25177283.ece | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✔ Yes |
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{ source assess table}}. |
generally reliable and should be treated as a newspaper of record. While it is true, as noted below, that the articles listed in the sources table are sourced primarily to quotes with people close to the firm, that's not fatal in my view because these are major newspapers that publish serious journalism. And, although they do feature quotes from those close to the firm, they are not merely repackaged press releases, as they include analysis that goes beyond the quotes provided. AleatoryPonderings ( talk) 19:23, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
*Delete: I'm sorry to say that despite appearances this VC lacks significant and independent coverage. Most of the links I found were primary sources/interviews/announcements (which, shockingly, I discovered is the case for everything at
Category:Venture capital firms of India -- but, sigh, that's another story..). The Hindu, too, is not infallible, as we've seen multiple times on these pages. Their story is based on
this press release with direct quotes picked up from it. I can find mentions of the company but, honestly, not the kind of significant coverage associated with encyclopaedic notability. This seems to me to be a case of
WP:TOOSOON. Let some time pass; let it breathe; let it affect the zeitgeist. Allow it to make a mark in the industry, to dictate business trends, and be independently reported on, something that captures its relevance -- apart from the bread-and-butter funding stories found in the pink papers. (As an aside, to understand what significant coverage looks like in this sector, one can observe
Sequoia Capital India backed by articles like this
Bloomberg Quint piece and even better and solid academic sources like this
Venture Capital Investments (
SAGE Publications, ISBN 9789353884161). The time will, perhaps, eventually come when the reliable sources for Chiratae Ventures will shout "notable". But that time, in my humble opinion, is not now. Best regards,
MaysinFourty (
talk) 07:40, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
"the level of attention that extends well beyond brief mentions and routine announcements."It does not seem to be the case here, the sources more or less speak about the same thing. While they may not be trivial, they are routine for any investment fund.
TruthLover123 ( talk) 06:39, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This discussion was subject to a
deletion review on 2020 October 15. For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review. |
The result was no consensus. Stifle ( talk) 13:42, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
WP:PROMO: Content made for Advertising, marketing, or public relations purposes. A spinoff VC firm cannot have the notability of it mother company. Qualifies for WP:TOOSOON. Calling for an AfD discussion. Hatchens ( talk) 10:15, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
Source assessment table:
| ||||
Source | Independent? | Reliable? | Significant coverage? | Count source toward GNG? |
---|---|---|---|---|
https://www.livemint.com/companies/news/chiratae-eyes-first-close-of-150-million-for-latest-india-focused-fund-1568221688692.html | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✔ Yes |
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/small-biz/startups/newsbuzz/chiratae-ventures-out-with-a-fresh-seed-fund-of-35-million-for-new-bets/articleshow/71177877.cms | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✔ Yes |
https://www.thehindu.com/business/Industry/idg-ventures-india-re-brands-to-chiratae-ventures/article25177283.ece | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✔ Yes |
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{ source assess table}}. |
generally reliable and should be treated as a newspaper of record. While it is true, as noted below, that the articles listed in the sources table are sourced primarily to quotes with people close to the firm, that's not fatal in my view because these are major newspapers that publish serious journalism. And, although they do feature quotes from those close to the firm, they are not merely repackaged press releases, as they include analysis that goes beyond the quotes provided. AleatoryPonderings ( talk) 19:23, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
*Delete: I'm sorry to say that despite appearances this VC lacks significant and independent coverage. Most of the links I found were primary sources/interviews/announcements (which, shockingly, I discovered is the case for everything at
Category:Venture capital firms of India -- but, sigh, that's another story..). The Hindu, too, is not infallible, as we've seen multiple times on these pages. Their story is based on
this press release with direct quotes picked up from it. I can find mentions of the company but, honestly, not the kind of significant coverage associated with encyclopaedic notability. This seems to me to be a case of
WP:TOOSOON. Let some time pass; let it breathe; let it affect the zeitgeist. Allow it to make a mark in the industry, to dictate business trends, and be independently reported on, something that captures its relevance -- apart from the bread-and-butter funding stories found in the pink papers. (As an aside, to understand what significant coverage looks like in this sector, one can observe
Sequoia Capital India backed by articles like this
Bloomberg Quint piece and even better and solid academic sources like this
Venture Capital Investments (
SAGE Publications, ISBN 9789353884161). The time will, perhaps, eventually come when the reliable sources for Chiratae Ventures will shout "notable". But that time, in my humble opinion, is not now. Best regards,
MaysinFourty (
talk) 07:40, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
"the level of attention that extends well beyond brief mentions and routine announcements."It does not seem to be the case here, the sources more or less speak about the same thing. While they may not be trivial, they are routine for any investment fund.
TruthLover123 ( talk) 06:39, 9 September 2020 (UTC)