Talk:New Profit Inc.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
New Profit was one of the first venture philanthropy funds started in America. It has funded the efforts of well-established national organizations such as Teach For America and College Summit that are run by social entrepreneurs. New Profit is a leader in the field of social entrepreneurship and its leadership staff often serve on panels in national conferences on the evolving field. (See Harvard Business School Case Study http://harvardbusinessonline.hbsp.harvard.edu/b02/en/common/item_detail.jhtml;jsessionid=WWAIGX212MB00AKRGWDR5VQBKE0YIISW?id=100052&referral=2341). —Preceding unsigned comment added by RShatten (talk • contribs) 04:01, 29 March 2008
- The article as it stands at the moment doesn't mention any of this. If this information were added, it might meet the notability guidelines. -- BeezHive (talk|contribs) 04:08, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
- Doubtful, if that were the case I'd fix it myself, but it would likely avoid A7. I'll leave it alone and see if the material is added, though any other admin may choose to delete at any time.--Doug.(talk • contribs) 05:25, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
- I've declined the speedy based on the (slim) claim to notability above. Barring further expansion of the article to clearly establish notability, I think that a fuller examination through discussion at AfD is warranted. --jonny-mt 06:19, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
- I just added two additional external links validating New Profit's notability through secondary sources. One was written in the Chronicle of Philanthropy. Entitled "Way to Grow," it discusses the importance of the emerging field of venture philanthropy and New Profit's role and its portfolio organizations' role within it (see http://www.philanthropy.com/premium/articles/v19/i22/22000701.htm). "The Matchmaker" was written for Forbes magazine and discusses the President and founder of New Profit, Vanessa Kirsch, and the importance of New Profit (see http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2002/1223/338.html). —Preceding unsigned comment added by RShatten (talk • contribs) 20:18, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
- I've declined the speedy based on the (slim) claim to notability above. Barring further expansion of the article to clearly establish notability, I think that a fuller examination through discussion at AfD is warranted. --jonny-mt 06:19, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
- Doubtful, if that were the case I'd fix it myself, but it would likely avoid A7. I'll leave it alone and see if the material is added, though any other admin may choose to delete at any time.--Doug.(talk • contribs) 05:25, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
