Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Delivery Hero


 * 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 keep. Snowball case. Company indisputably notable; no valid reason offered for nomination. (non-admin closure) Wikidemon (talk) 23:59, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Delivery Hero

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable company. Nothing significant but another startup company. For being in Wikipedia need to be much more significant than this. Else Wikipedia will become a Startup directory. 1000s of startups happens every day. Just another one. Article is written only for company promotional and advertising purposes. References are very poor in terms of coverage they provide. No depth coverage by independent media for its notability but script given to large media group. Nothing significant or notable about the company to be here. does not meet notability criteria for companies. Once in a lifetime coverage in popular media is not enough to be part of its significance. or being released as press or promotional exercises. Light2021 (talk) 10:06, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
 * This nomination is word for word identical to one made 7 minutes later at Articles for deletion/TripHobo. Unscintillating (talk) 02:01, 16 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep They are not a random start-up company, with 2,000 employees and ~200 mio Euro revenue they are very substantial. They are very established in Germany and are basically in a duopoly with the only other large competitor (Lieferando/Takeaway.com) in the area of online-fast-food delivery ordering-services (which is huge in Germany). There is plenty of coverage (which goes beyond routine news blurps and press releases) of the company and its brands (among others Pizza.de and Lieferheld) in reliable sources to satisfy WP:GNG and WP:CORPDEPTH. A few selected examples In German:
 * Pizza.de and Lieferheld annoy Delivery services (long in-depth article about how Pizza.de, and its competitor cause massive problems for the actual food producers in the Wirtschaftswoche)
 * Do delivery-services bite the hand which feed them? another Wirtschaftwoche long in-depth article about the delivery service situation in Germany, prominently featuring pizza.de as largest competitor in Germany for an entire page of the 3 page report
 * War of the pizza portals (Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung) another long in-depth article about the company and its business model
 * Delivery Hero, the 3 billion start-up (Handelsblatt) another long in-depth article about the company and its business model
 * Plenty of articles in basically every German news outlet about their planned stock market entry: Berlin Delivery Hero prepares for stock market entry (Berliner Morgenpost), Delivery Hero continues with stock market entry (n-tv, also calls them "worlds largest online delivery order platform")
 * Plenty of coverage for their financial relations with Rocket Internet; Large Investment into Delivery Hero (welt.de), Rocket Internet invests 500 mio in Delivery Hero (Süddeutsche Zeitung), Delivery Hero/Rocket Internet invests in food delivery services (Spiegel online) and others in basically every major news outlet
 * Coverage of aqusitions: Delivery Hero swallows Pizza.de (Süddeutsche Zeitung), Delivery Hero swallows competitor (Spiegel online), Delivery Hero buys Turkish competitor (Handelsblatt) and others in basically every major news outlet
 * Various coverage of legal problems: (Police raid at Delivery Hero (spiegel online), and entire article in the print magazine: Cyberwar of the pizza delivery men in Der Spiegel and others in basically every major news outlet
 * And this is just the RS situation in Germany. Since have expanded greatly worldwide, there are probably much more reliable souces about them in other media in other countries. The article itself could obviously improved, but the company clearly passes the notability guidelines. I therefore think the article should definitely stay. Dead Mary (talk) 17:29, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America1000 19:48, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. North America1000 19:48, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. North America1000 19:48, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Merely the coverage does not define its notability standards. As nominated the reasons, such companies are able to garner enough PR at once for their own promotions. After-all all the mention agencies are commercial in nature as well. Once in a lifetime coverage does not harm anybody. By this logic Wikipedia will end and become directory for such companies which somehow succeeded in publishing themselves in popular media. There are similar incident in other area of world as well, where such heavy funded companies are making news merely giving script to media. Cashkaro.com, Delhivery, Yourstory and others. Numbers of employee or customers does not make any company wikipedia notable. It may have been covered by major media. But Depth of coverage is highly questionable. Light2021 (talk) 21:09, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I understand your point, but this company is not even remotely comparable to the cases you listed. Didn't you see the sources I posted? This company gets covered far beyond routine coverage and PR press releases you mentioned. This company is not a fresh start-up from yesterday who did a small media uproar and then faltered. It is now years old and a giant in this completely new market in Germany. The introduction of online delivery service portals in Germany had a very huge impact and did alter the market and food delivery business drastically with major implications for literally every Pizza and fast-food outlet in Germany. As result there are tons of in-depth articles and coverages in German RS - major general newspapers as well as business newspapers - which did analyze the market and this company (which controls about 75% of the market in Germany) very critically. I literally posted a number of examples of lengthy and critically articles about this company and its business above here. Its unfortunately German, but even a brief scanning would reveal it is substantial and can be verified by Google translate. And again, this is only the situation in Germany, they are dominating this market in other countries too. Dead Mary (talk) 17:26, 12 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep: per significant coverage listed above by Dead Mary. As for "Merely the coverage does not define its notability standards", actually, it does. The relevant policy is WP:GNG, which states: "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list." This company has received this type of coverage, as evidenced above, and it therefore meets our notability guidelines. Safehaven86 (talk) 21:27, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep. Sources listed by Dead Mary meet WP:CORPDEPTH, especially considering sources from major outlets like the Süddeutsche Zeitung and the Der Spiegel website. Patar knight - chat/contributions 01:06, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep Sources shown.  No WP:NOT problems with the article have been identified, because this is a cookie cutter nomination that shows no verifiable evidence of having looked at the article.  Unscintillating (talk) 02:01, 16 October 2016 (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.