Deletion of Lemelson Capital Management

Comment: that really should be discussed in a new RFC should this article survive or be re-created: I recommend that all future editors of this article who have a onflict of interest should be explicitly required to either declare their COI or restrict themselves to editing in accordance with onflict of interest as if they did have a conflict of interest.  In other words, I'm recommending that if you edit in a way that violates OI, you must immediately declare your conflict of interest.  Supporting or opposing this recommendation will influence whether a formal RFC is started, but until there is a clear consensus to do this as evidenced by an RFC, it won't be enforceable
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Copyrights (WP:C||WP:C||WP:COI)

Comment: If the Amvona hedge fund is notable, then it might qualify for an article.  Since |notability is not inherited, that doesn't qualify the management company for one.  The article creator has certainly put up a blizzard of press releases, but it doesn't matter if you have five non-independent sources or fifty, not a single one of them can be used to support notability
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:NOTINHERITED)

Comment: 2-year-old entity that puts out plenty of press releases. I also see brief mentions in the context of WWE. What I do not see, among the dozens of refs in the article, or in Google or Highbeam searchs, is substantial, independent coverage from |reliable sources
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)