[1] https://www.spglobal.com/spdji/en/documents/additional-mater...
It's not my responsibility nor is it even possible to find a reference to a claim that is false. If you claim that X is a requirement, I can't possibly cite a specific page that says "X is not a requirement" because it's not feasible to enumerate all things that are NOT requirements. All I can do is refer you to the list of requirements and ask you to point out which item in that list substantiates your position. That is what I've done by referencing that document which specifies the eligibility criteria and methodology and that's about the most anyone can do since it's generally not possible to prove a negative.
Now you mistakenly believe that page 8 substantiates that claim, but it doesn't. What page 8 states is the following:
>The sum of the most recent four consecutive quarters’ Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) earnings (net income excluding discontinued operations) SHOULD be positive as SHOULD the most recent quarter.
The use of the word "should" is as a recommendation, compared to the use of the word "must" which is used for criteria that is mandatory, for example on page 6:
>The issuing company MUST have the following organizational structure and share type...
Now being that it's a suggestion instead of a mandatory requirement, one would reasonably expect there to be an example that goes against that recommendation, and of course there are plenty but for a very recent example take CZR, which was just added to the S&P 500 in March of 2021 despite not having produced a profit since 2019.
https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/CZR?p=CZR
It doesn't fall under any of the exemptions either.