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 merge to Startup company. Given the argument and sources made by Edison, it is obvious that this is not simply a failed or barely used neologism. Therefore, the best course of action is a merge as discussed below. For the purposes of closing this AFD I've selected Startup company, but this is not necessarily binding and can be changed if the involved editors find a better location for the data. — Coffee // have a cup // essay // 14:59, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Startup investing

[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This appears to be wp:artspam for Rock the Post's new “Startup Investing” program. See the external link to their announcement page [1]. Also, the term is not used in the four references for the abstract. Nowa (talk) 11:05, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Rcsprinter (post) @ 17:15, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - per nom. I'd have requested speedy deletion. The creator of the article has a COI and should be blocked for continuing to edit against WP:COI to promote his personal interests and use Wikipedia as a means of promotion. --Ronz (talk) 23:39, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep' -- With the passing of the JOBS Act the word startup investing is becoming a movement. The article should not be deleted as it is intended to educate people. There is a lot of coverage in the media that can be found as a result of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission General Solicitation ban lift from September 23, 2013 all using the word startup investing as a way to explain and describe this action. In addition, the sources on the article include the most renown financial publications like the Financial Times, The Wall Street Journal, or Bloomberg L.P.. --acremades (talk) 00:33, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Please provide sources that demonstrate this. --Ronz (talk) 00:53, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment'-- As requested here are some references where startup investing is used.
Startup Investing Trends by Paul Graham http://www.paulgraham.com/invtrend.html

9 Things You Need To Know About Startup Investing by Forbes http://www.forbes.com/sites/tanyaprive/2013/03/18/9-things-you-need-to-know-for-startup-investing/

VC 101: Houston Fund Gives Students Startup Investing Experience by Xconomy http://www.xconomy.com/texas/2013/09/23/vc-101-houston-fund-gives-students-startup-investing-experience In addition, there is a complete entire section on Reddit about Startup Investing that can be found on this link http://www.reddit.com/r/startupinvesting — Preceding unsigned comment added by Acremades (talk • contribs) 03:40, 8 October 2013‎
If that's the best available, then it should be deleted. It's a neologism that's barely used. --Ronz (talk) 04:23, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment'-- these are just a few examples of many. Please go to Google and type in startup investing. On the search result for news you will be able to see thousands of articles that use this exact keyword. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Acremades (talk • contribs) 04:47, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It might be a good idea to first edit the article to remove company specific promotional materials. Then finding suitable references may be easier.--Nowa (talk) 17:38, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment'-- Please consider reviewing this comment http://www.usv.com/posts/startup-investing from Fred Wilson (financier) where he states "crazy that they are considering deleting that entry" with regard to this deletion nomination. Fred Wilson (financier) is one of the most respected Venture Capitalists in the world with investments in companies such as Twitter, Tumblr, Foursquare, Zynga, Kickstarter, and 10gen. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Acremades (talk • contribs) 15:11, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It's irrelevant. As we repeatedly state, it comes down to sources, not opinions. --Ronz (talk) 15:40, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've invited them to join the discussion.--Nowa (talk) 18:56, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger _{One ping only} 04:16, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger _{One ping only} 01:16, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or merge. The article might need to be a bit broader, to avoid giving undue weight to one company or approach, but the term "startup investing" has been used sometimes as a synonym for "seed investing" for the past several years, and is not a failed neologism or a neologism which hasn't gained common use. See, from a Google Book search, a few of the results:[2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8]. Perhaps this could be merged to Startup company. Edison (talk) 15:17, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The closest article I can find is Seed money. Is there anything better for a merge? --Ronz (talk) 15:27, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Startup company. Candleabracadabra (talk) 00:27, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Merge is sensible, but where to is unclear. AfD is not meant as the place to discuss mergers, pardon the pun. This seems to be a bit of a neologism. Bearian (talk) 18:57, 24 October 2013 (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.