Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TravelBank

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. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 15:12, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

TravelBank

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Doesn't pass WP:GNG, clearly WP:TOOSOON. It says number of employees to be 17, which makes clear, created by an affiliated user. Delete. Sundartripathi (talk) 04:18, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:31, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:31, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:15, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This is an uncivil tone in this nomination, and there is no argument for deletion. AfD is not a forum for incivility. Unscintillating (talk) 20:27, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unscintillating, My bad, apologizes for doing it. It just happened in the flow of nominating a number of spam pages in one go for deletion(clearly created for Advertising their product & services). Corrected the tone. Sundartripathi (talk) 03:42, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for responding to my concern. Unscintillating (talk) 00:55, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:36, 2 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment -- There is a pattern for articles about startups that are accepted; they included less data. The more that is written, the more possible objections there are. At the risk of a standard that can be gamed, I suggest an informal yardstick in addition to WP:RS (a common flaw). Fulfill two out of five, keep. Fail to make two, delete.

Time in business: two years
Employees: 20
Funds invested: $2 million
Profitable
Products: Two demonstrably new, not improvements or derivative

I suggest that the list of investors and founders is not important, even if the article is a WP:COATRACK for them.

The most successful publishers can be found in List of Y Combinator startups. Competing suggestions requested. Rhadow (talk) 11:59, 2 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

- Response I suggest something even simpler. We already have notability criteria for companies. Let's not make a special set for "start-ups". -- HighKing⁺⁺ 16:36, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete References fail WP:CORPDEPTH and/or WP:ORGIND. No indications of meeting the criteria for notability. -- HighKing⁺⁺ 16:36, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- the sources listed are routine launch publicity, as in: "TravelBank Launches Expense Account App That Pays You For Underspending"! Fails WP:CORPDEPTH, with no indications of notability or significance just yet. K.e.coffman (talk) 06:22, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as Aug.2017 main subject articles in Wall Street Journal, Yahoo Finance and TechCrunch. Burroughs'10 (talk) 05:23, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To allow time to evaluate the sources suggested by Burroughs'10
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- RoySmith (talk) 15:11, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Subject fails WP:NCORP. Chris Troutman (talk) 03:14, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment -- none of the sources offered above meet WP:CORPDEPTH, being PR-driven. For example, here's an excerpt from one of the articles:

TravelBank CEO and co-founder Duke Chung acknowledges that business travelers have historically prioritized convenience over cost.

He noted that more than 90% of business air travel is determined by three factors: flying on their favorite airlines; the desire to travel during business hours (between 9 a.m. and 6 p.m.); and flying to and from a specific airport.

But, unfortunately, adhering to these criteria results in employees purchasing the most expensive flights out there.

“Companies are already expensing the highest quartile flights out there. So our idea is to actually reward travelers for choosing options that could be several hundred dollars cheaper,” Chung said.

“It is such a pain in the butt for a CFO to have predictable travel expenses and it’s actually very difficult for these large organizations to control expenses for employees’ travels. With TravelBank, the user wins, the company wins and TravelBank wins. I like the scheme,” DCM co-founder and general partner David Chao told Yahoo Finance.

Chao, who will receive one seat on the TravelBank board, said he was particularly intrigued by the company’s enterprise approach.

This is literally the company's co-founder and the company board's member praising the company's relevance and pitching its business to prospective customers. K.e.coffman (talk) 04:51, 15 September 2017 (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.