Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Principal and interest guaranteed security

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Principal and interest guaranteed security

Principal and interest guaranteed security (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

Blatant advert for a type of loan offered by one (only one) Canadian company, with links to the company and it's subsidiary. No assertion of notability and no secondary sources. JohnnyMrNinja 03:11, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

  • Strong Delete. Unreferenced, created by SPA, reads as a disguised company advert. Minkythecat (talk) 13:08, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Speedy delete. My initial impression on reading this was to speedily delete it as blatant advertising. I see that speedy deletion had been declined by DGG on that ground, so I reverted myself. I beg to differ; it is blatant advertising:

    PIGS are not only safe because of the diversified range of businesses within the basket but because the fund also takes a direct involvement in each of the businesses in which they invest. Thru its subsidiary company Integrated Business Concepts (IBC) and other supporting affiliates, a complete synergy is formed. Best practices are implemented in each company from the training of the CEO down to the way the receptionist answers the phone. This type of synergy is essential in obtaining the fastest path to profitability since time, energy, and capital is not wasted on the learning curve.

    Yeah, sure, and I have a bridge for sale, too. It may be better to just let it run its course, so that any attempt to re-create similar or related articles can be summarily deleted. Quaere, is there a "Wikipedia does not offer investment advice" template? - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 13:59, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
  • I confess I did not notice those two paragraphs, for some reason--if I had, I would at least have deleted them. Now, if those paragraphs were removed, would there possibly be an article? If so, it does not qualify for speedy. The question really is, are there other references to this? DGG (talk) 14:40, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Strong response - Searching for this phrase hasn't revealed anything. I highly encourage anyone who thinks they might find for notability to look before the end of this AfD, but I have personally come up with nothing. JohnnyMrNinja 07:29, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
The article seems to propose the sale of a kind of mutual fund with an investment strategy that is, ahem, highly unusual. The proponents claim to be able to guarantee their investors a return based on a fund that says it invests in startups that also buy a common management plan from the same people. It would surprise me to find that this is a widely shared strategy, and frankly, "it'll end in tears." - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 14:18, 7 June 2008 (UTC)