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.
Keep. Evaluating the sourcing for these sorts of AfDs is tricky because there are untold numbers of passing mentions and non-independent sources, but on balance I think there's probably enough here for notability even under
WP:NCORP's very strict definition of significant coverage.
Here's an article in The Times: although it discusses a corporate announcement, it also provides analysis, opining that "Atticus's downsizing is another sign that the era [of] high-profile, aggressive hedge funds, that publicly berated companies' management and flaunted their connections to the rich and famous, has ended".
This article in the Wall Street Journal describes the company's history, noting that the fund "angered some investors in March 2008 with how it treated its investment in Deutsche Boerse" and has "received unwanted attention because of" various scandals involving its co-chairman
Nathaniel Philip Rothschild.
Here's an article from The Daily Telegraph discussing the company's tremendous losses during the financial crisis, and
here's another one describing both its "reputation as a formidable active manager" and
Lord Rothschild's decision to withdraw his money from the firm owned by his son due to its poor performance.
This article in the Financial Times discusses how the fund "helped dictate the course of mega-mergers and corporate strategy at some of the world's biggest companies - and made a fortune in the process", but it also describes its "galling" losses and the fact that its executives will consequently receive no bonuses. I think it's clear that these sources, which come from some of the world's most reliable outlets and which discuss the fund in significant (and often unflattering) detail, are far more than just the routine churnalism that most Wall Street firms generate. The fund is also discussed in
thesetwo books published by
Wiley, showing that there's coverage from outside the often-ephemeral business press. There are many more sources available in ProQuest and elsewhere, but I think these ones are enough to show an NCORP pass.
Extraordinary Writ (
talk)
01:24, 11 March 2022 (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.