Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fifth Wall Ventures
No it’s not, and personally I think it is not a case of , the coverage is absolutely routine, and asserts , as it is the same routine press coverage as other funds receive when paid crowd decide to put up an article on WP. Most of the venture capital funds are entirely generic in nature and use the same business models and software to identify investment vehicles. There is barely any difference between one fund and another. They are entirely generic. That is whole point of them. Once the business model is produced and found to be successful, it is duplicated everywhere. That’s is the reason why we have so many articles of the same type. And the same routine press coverage trumpets the news to enable people to find the fund. Same model and process every time.  What happened to doing the work, to see if they are actually different, instead of basing it on the crude measure of how much they have? It is the crudest measure possible. It always puzzles me why need to have these types of articles. We were supposed to be sort of learned society, and certainly policy and rules are written in that manner and the makeup of the editor crowd reflects that to some extent, but 10 years of attrition by the  crowd has worn us down
— User:Scope, 20:46, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:TOOSOON||WP:ORGIND||WP:PAID (Wikipedia:Too soon)