- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. BD2412 T 01:35, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Visit Guide[edit]
- Visit Guide (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non notable travel company. Most of the references are press releases or self published. Seems to be an obvious case of WP:COI as the editor only seems to be creating articles on associated companies recently including Visit Ventures Jupitus Smart 18:24, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep: :Dear Jupitus, this might seems fishy to you, but in my country we do not have many success stories to follow, i'm not a fan of this particular startup/app/company but more like it is the only one who dared to challenge the system here, they are working without the so-called travel license which was invented by our government and being sold for millions, and inside our social media we really talk about these stories, however the official sources or links i added as sources are not Press Releases, Arabic is my main language and i assure you there are not Press Releases at all, they are normal coverage.
- Your can also see my article about The White Days which is also very popular and it is a prove that my main focus is not as you said, however i admit that i care for this startup and any other startup in my region and that is why i can work on the article to improve it even further and to add extra sources by doing an extra research. El Prime 11:54, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
- I believe i can improve it and add other sources, it is true it is a startup and the timeline idea might not be the best, however i have been following the progress of this app for a while.
- The encyclopedic value behind the whole thing is a related to the ecosystem in our region and how it reacts to individual startups, the way they made success by moving away from Egypt into a monopoly-free environment is important for this generation and the next one, Startups should not be controlled by governments and this is why we should understand that Wikipedia should not focus only on Corporations and their stories El Prime 12:46, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
- Dear @Elprime: Wikipedia is not the place for recording timelines of companies that are coming up. I would however urge you to continue improving the article in any manner you possibly can during the course of this discussion as other editors will only be assessing the article's eligibility to remain based on the latest available iteration of the article. I would also like to know why you would be 'hanged' for creating this article in the Arabic Wikipedia and why you feel the same fate will not await you for creating the article here. In case there exists a credible risk, I would not suggest undertaking the risk for company fluff like this. Jupitus Smart 13:35, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Dear @Jupitus Smart I made some edits and improved it a little bit, in the Arabic version we have pro-gov editors that will take anything down that does not seem right for the country's image, however this is the truth of how startups are being treated and how innovation is being rewarded.
- Thanks for your support and i will keep improving the article until during this voting/discussion process.
- El Prime 13:58, 14 November 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elprime (talk • contribs)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 10:20, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment according to the article, the company is Egyptian/British. According to Companies House, Visit Ventures Ltd in the UK was dissolved by compulsory strike-off in March this year. This is usually the fate of a company that has lost all its assets to the extent that its management no longer have any interest in retaining any part of it. It is not normal for notable companies to get bits of themselves struck off. Of course it may be a different company, but it listed its business as web portals, tour operators and travel agency, which matches the expected. This doesn't affect whatever business activities might exist Egypt. Elemimele (talk) 13:18, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment @Elemimele Sorry for the delay, the climate is changing here in Egypt and weather is not stable but i made a search to verify whither Visit Ventures LTD is Egyptian or not and here is what i found i two languages.
- https://visit.guide/en/page/about-us
- https://visit.guide/ar/page/about-us
- I also verified the credibility by checking Internet Archive ( History ) of the page and it has been like that for a long time, so Visit Ventures exist here in our country but Visit Guide exist in United Kingdom of Britain. El Prime 18:19, 22 November 2021 (UTC)
- Okay, so this is the situation: Visit Ventures Ltd (in the UK) was a company (since struck off) in the business of web-portals, tour-operating, and travel agency, established by IBRAHIM, Shehab Ahmed, an Egyptian. It may have nothing to do with Visit Guide Ltd in the UK, which has two officers, presumably a single person, SHEHATA, Shehab Ahmed Ibrahim Ahmed (also Egyptian; I note a similarity of name but this may be a different individual), and the same listed nature of business. Visit Guide Ltd has the same company number as the one in your source, Elprime (talk · contribs), but became incorporated on 10 Dec 2020 with a total capital of £92. It has not posted any update/accounts since. On this basis it is very hard to consider the UK end of the enterprise as notable; I suspect it is WP:TOOSOON. Your source was honest and helpful in tracing what's going on at the UK end, but cannot of itself establish notability as it's the company's own description of themselves. We really need some 3rd-party, independent source. I'm ashamed to say I cannot read Arabic so I cannot assess what's going on at the Egyptian end of things. Elemimele (talk) 19:26, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 00:46, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete WP:NCORP requires multiple sources (at least two) of deep or significant coverage with in-depth information *on the company* and (this bit is important!) containing "Independent Content". "Independent content", in order to count towards establishing notability, must include original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject. That means, nothing that relies on company information or announcements or interviews, etc. None of the references in the article meet the criteria, just the usual PR-derived articles based on company announcements. I have been unable to find any references that meet NCORP criteria, topic fails WP:NCORP. HighKing++ 12:15, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, per nom, for failing WP:NCORP. I note from the history section that they received a trademark in late 2021. It is late 2021; this lends credence to WP:TOOSOON. Ifnord (talk) 22:49, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.