Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Akbar Travels


 * 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. Per lack of significant coverage in independent reliable sources. Beeblebrox (talk) 04:47, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Akbar Travels

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Grandiose claims; of course, google does give a bunch of hits since it's an online business... but is this notable? Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 08:34, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - only a few passing mentions in Google Books and Google Scholar. — Mr. Stradivarius  ( drop me a line ) 13:21, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:24, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:24, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep, It has sufficient reference which can establish WP:Notability, ref1, ref2, It is also the largest travel agent in India, ref3. I think its sufficient to establish notability. KuwarOnline Talk''' 10:42, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the references. It does seem that they are a big travel agency. That doesn't automatically mean that they are notable, however. There needs to be independent coverage, and I'm afraid your first two references fail this criterion, as they are basically just press releases. There should be something in there that makes note of the impact they have on some aspect of society, not just "We are expanding". See Notability (organizations and companies) and particularly the Independence of sources section for guidelines. There seems like there could be something to the third reference, though. Do you have any more details about this "Abacus President’s Award"? From the reference you provided it looks like a very corporate thing. I'd be inclined to accept it as proof of notability if it can show some effect on society, but not if it's just an award for being a profitable company. Maybe there are sources in one of the Indian languages? Remember that sources don't have to be in English -- although I won't be able to check them. All the best. — Mr. Stradivarius  ( drop me a line ) 13:17, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:07, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Comment. From third reference it says “We are thrilled to win this prestigious President’s Award from our preferred and largest GDS partner,” said K.V. Abdul Nazar, Chairman and Managing Director of Akbar Travels.  So, will a partner awarding oneself be sufficient for WP:N?
 * Also in same page, Presenting the award, Mr Robert Bailey, President and CEO of Abacus International, said, “... ... Abacus is proud to be the preferred partner for Akbar Travels in its continued growth efforts over the long-term.” Again, it seems to be a pat in the back from a partner. VasuVR  ( talk,  contribs ) 06:13, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, that was also my initial impression. Unless more evidence is forthcoming I suggest that we don't accept this award as proof of notability. — Mr. Stradivarius  ( drop me a line ) 11:38, 16 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete Nothing outside of press releases and a few listings in Lonely Planet and a couple of other travel guides that I've been able to find (in addition to one consumer court case listing on Indian Express), doesn't pass GNG/CORP on that basis, especially without any RS support for the claims within the article including that of largest travel agent in India. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  16:51, 18 January 2011 (UTC)


 * 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.