In the world of
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pioneer Fund (Venture Capital Firm), there is a great diversity of approaches, ideas and opinions that can generate an extremely enriching exchange of knowledge. This is why it is crucial to delve deeper into the different aspects surrounding this topic, in order to understand its impact on today's society. From its origins to its future implications,
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pioneer Fund (Venture Capital Firm) has become a point of interest for academics, professionals and the general public. Through this article, we will seek to explore the various facets of
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pioneer Fund (Venture Capital Firm) and its relevance in the contemporary world, offering new perspectives and reflections that contribute to the enrichment of the debate around this transcendental topic.
- 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! 05:20, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
- Pioneer Fund (Venture Capital Firm) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable venture capital firm. No sources I could find that satisfy general notability or NCORP, not to mention the handful of low quality ones listed in the article, which range from self-published to routine. The TechCrunch ones are about a third party and not the firm itself. PK650 (talk) 01:10, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- Hi, calling out this cited Inc. article which hails the fund as the most active investor in silicon valley, thoughts on it? BananaManCanDance (talk) 05:03, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- This report is insufficient to demonstrate the company's notability for Wikipedia. There is no significant coverage of the topic. Gedaali (talk) 20:52, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- The article is useful as a source but I don't think it helps with notability much given it's not exclusively about the VC firm. PK650 (talk) 23:15, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
Delete As stated above, these are my reasons. Gedaali (talk) 20:54, 11 January 2025 (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.