Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FlipKey (2nd nomination)


 * 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 in one form or another. Despite a long discussion, there is no consensus whether to keep as a stand-alone article or to merge it to TripAdvisor, but a merge proposal can and should be discussed at the talk page anyway.

Despite being often cited, none of the sections of WP:NOT mentioned (e.g. WP:NOTPROMO, WP:NOTGUIDE) actually prescribe deletion as the only way to handle such content. On the contrary, per WP:WHATISTOBEDONE, deletion is only one possible way to handle it, with editing to remove the problematic content (in line with WP:PRESERVE and WP:ATD) being mentioned first.

As for the WP:INDISCRIMINATE argument, that section of WP:NOT does not actually talk about some kind of coverage but instead talks about how content is presented here. I think what SwisterTwister means is the WP:SPIP section of WP:N, however, there is no consensus that his analysis of the sources is correct.  So Why  08:52, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

FlipKey
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Last AfD was deleted, and still we are here with this. Routine coverage, non notable startup. usual for promotion alone. Previously done A7/ G11. Deleted earlier and created again. Salt and Definite spam. Light2021 (talk) 20:27, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions.  Jupitus Smart  09:00, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions.  Jupitus Smart  09:00, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:02, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.  The article notes: "Given these terms, the Haggler would be reluctant to rent from FlipKey, which is owned by TripAdvisor. But what gives the Haggler real pause is that the Better Business Bureau currently gives the company an F rating, along with an average customer review of 1.01 out of five stars. Many of the 190 complaints now listed on B.B.B.’s company page echoed Ms. Beattie’s experience. In September, one reviewer described renting a house in Ireland and discovering mold the first night. Like Ms. Beattie, the renter stayed through the entire scheduled trip — “There were 11 adults and two infants; we had no option but to stick it out.” A claim under the payment protection plan was denied."  The article notes: "FlipKey offers condos, cabins, houses and villas. Users can book about 40(PERCENT) of the lodgings online, and properties with the best combination of reviews, rates, photos and other factors rise to the top of their lists. Properties: 240,000 listings in 12,000 destinations, including 15,000 in the Caribbean. Filters: Search by deals, Internet availability, lodging type, bedrooms, price, pool, child-friendly. Pros: Large inventory with user reviews. Pay through FlipKey Payments and receive free insurance up to $10,000 if the lodging proves to be significantly different from what's described or is unavailable.  Cons: Lodgings not inspected. A booking fee may be required. No concierge service."  The article notes: "Travel & Leisure magazine named Flipkey, which has more than 90,000 properties worldwide, its top vacation rental site in 2008. Flipkey has more than 85,000 guest reviews posted. (Guests must be invited by Flipkey, by e-mail, to post a review based on confirmed booking records). Flipkey's user-friendly structure lets you sort rentals by dates, number of rooms/guests and price. More than half of Flipkey's properties are represented by property managers, who often create packages that include coupons, kids' activities and discounts. Because the extra amenities may not appear on the website, Mahony suggests e-mailing or calling the property manager or owner. HomeAway guarantees that its properties exist -- a vacation rental concern. Flipkey does not, but both companies verify that the property managers and/or owners are who they claim to be. Both advise renters to get and sign a rental agreement before sending a deposit for a vacation rental (typically 10% to 30%). Mahony says managed properties usually accept credit cards and many take Paypal."  The article notes: "FlipKey was founded by Jeremiah Gall, T.J. Mahony, and Carl Query in 2007 (and was acquired by TripAdvisor in 2009) to be the “go-to” site for vacation rentals. The site leverages guest reviews for rental properties whose owners/managers must be verified by the company before their rentals can be featured on the site. FlipKey features over 300,000 rental properties in 179 countries." <li> The article notes: "FlipKey.com co-founder and Chief Executive TJ Mahoney found himself onstage Friday at the MIT Venture Capital Conference with partners from two venture firms that took a pass on his company. The discussion provided a lesson in why it pays to keep your options open. FlipKey is an online vacation-rental company going head-to-head with HomeAway Inc., which has raised about $400 million. TripAdvisor LLC is now FlipKey’s majority owner, but before that August 2008 deal, Mahoney was shopping for venture capital. Among the firms he approached were Spark Capital and Venrock. During a panel discussion on seed-stage financing, moderator Tim Rowe, founder and CEO of the Cambridge Innovation Center, pressed partners from those two firms on why they didn’t invest in FlipKey."</li> <li> The article notes: "Newton, MA-based travel media network TripAdvisor said yesterday that it has acquired a majority stake in FlipKey, a Boston-based consumer review site for rental vacation homes. FlipKey was launched in March by TJ Mahony, Carl Query and Jeremiah Gall; Mahony and Query previously founded Boston-based web analytics and marketing firm Compete.com, which was purchased by London market research company TNS in March for $150 million. The terms of the FlipKey acquisition were not disclosed."</li> <li></li> <li> The article notes: "FlipKey.com especially caters to professional property managers, but the $300 annual rate makes it attractive for casual users, as well. FlipKey also offers short-term subscriptions for about $30 a month. That's perfect if you want to advertise your home for only a few weeks or even a couple months out of the year. FlipKey allows you to upload unlimited photos. Reviews on this site are limited to those written by verified travelers to prevent spam issues on your property's page. As a bonus, listings posted on FlipKey are automatically added to the popular travel site TripAdvisor."</li> <li> The article notes: "FlipKey by TripAdvisor. FlipKey lets you rent out private rooms or entire structures. The service fee is 3% per booking, or owners can pay an annual fee that starts at $399. The site holds payments from guests until after check-in. TripAdvisor, which owns other sites as well, collects and pays occupancy taxes in certain cities. No insurance products are available. Hosts can impose a security deposit."</li> <li> The article notes: "FlipKey was founded in 2006 by CEO T.J. Mahony, COO Jeremiah Gall and CTO Carl Query with $400,000 in seed funding from a syndicate of angel investors. In March, the company launched its website that features 50,000 vacation homes, rental listings and consumer reviews of featured properties, company officials said. FlipKey’s web-based software works similarly to TripAdvisor.com by creating profiles of the properties, authenticating them for potential vacationers. And, like TripAdvisor, it enables users to rate the properties after stays."</li> <li> The article notes: "FlipKey is TripAdvisor’s attempt at breaking into the vacation rental market. With over 150,000 rentals in 7,000 cities worldwide, most listings are found in the United States, Europe, Mexico and Brazil, with Florida, Italy and Rio de Janeiro being the most popular. Search either by price, available deals, property type and other parameters, and their “My Pick” feature allows guests to make multiple selections and compare them later. The user reviews that drive TripAdvisor’s success also make an appearance here. FlipKey bills itself as “the largest collection of verified and trusted guest reviews in the industry,” and reviewers are allowed to submit their own pictures. When you find something you like, contact the host for the rental agreement, which spells out all prices and policies, before paying either by credit card, PayPal or other arrangements. Unlike many of its competitors, FlipKey doesn’t charge a booking fee."</li> <li> The article notes: "FlipKey.com was launched in 2008 to help vacation rental property managers and owners promote guest reviews. In contrast to sites that let anyone post, FlipKey collects reviews by sending e-mails to people who actually stayed at a property."</li> </ol>There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow FlipKey to pass Notability, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard (talk) 08:47, 8 July 2017 (UTC) </ul>
 * Again the same way of misleading AfD and discussion, unnecessary making it long copy paste job without reading its a routine coverage and nothing else. this way this whole AfD gone wrong as such lengthy way makes it highly confusing, what is the point of all this? On every AfD its been done by Cunard. just go to link and copy and paste it here. Light2021 (talk) 09:17, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete and Salt (given similar violations) as the sources given above are actually only WP:INDISCRIMINATE press releases-like coverage, take the first one which is WP:Guide -like information and none of it would help since it's consumer-targeted, also both WPIndiscriminate and WP:Guide is help vacation rental property managers and owners promote guest reviews. In contrast to sites that let anyone post, FlipKey collects reviews by sending e-mails to people who actually stayed at a property. (None of it is actually meaningful substance), FlipKey bills itself as “the largest collection of verified and trusted guest reviews in the industry,” and reviewers are allowed to submit their own pictures. When you find something you like, contact the host for the rental agreement, which spells out all prices and policies, before paying either by credit card, PayPal or other arrangements. Unlike many of its competitors, FlipKey doesn’t charge a booking fee. is then no different given it appears like a "About Us" therefore WP:PROMO, we then have #10 which is WP:INDISCRIMINATE local business journals unacceptable by WP:ORGIND, #8 and #9 is the same with FlipKey allows you to upload unlimited photos. Reviews on this site are limited to those written by verified travelers to prevent spam issues on your property's page. and FlipKey lets you rent out private rooms or entire structures. The service fee is 3% per booking, or owners can pay an annual fee that starts at $399. The site holds payments from guests until after check-in. TripAdvisor, which owns other sites as well, collects and pays occupancy taxes in certain cities. No insurance products are available. Hosts can impose a security deposit. (i'll also note the one "scan" story was trivial compared to all the existing promotionalism). #4, 5 and 6 all follow this with information not only similar but also mirroring the company webpages, worse when it was also clearly labeled as tied to the businesspeople. #2 and 3 are following the pattern: FlipKey offers condos, cabins, houses and villas. Users can book about 40(PERCENT) of the lodgings online, and properties with the best combination of reviews, rates, photos and other factors rise to the top of their lists. and Guests must be invited by Flipkey, by e-mail, to post a review based on confirmed booking records). Flipkey's user-friendly structure lets you sort rentals by dates, number of rooms/guests and price.. GNG is always non-negotiable with policies and especially when the coverage is simply sugarjacketed as "independent". SwisterTwister   talk  17:04, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep because independent reliable sources do give it significant coverage. This article was recreated three years by a user who has no other edits, so was probably company spam at that time.  But it has gotten enough coverage to pass the WP:GNG.  I added in the negative bit from the New York Times mentioning they got an F by the Better Business Bureau and removed one peacock word.   D r e a m Focus  21:27, 8 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Merge/Redirect to TripAdvisor. The existing content is very low quality and probably needs to be re-written entirely. Power~enwiki (talk) 01:58, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete & redirect name only to TripAdvisor where the subject is mentioned; not independently notable. Sources above are not convincing, and are mostly PR driven, as in "FlipKey creates awesome virtual tour of Boston as the first in a series of traveler guides!" etc. K.e.coffman (talk) 05:28, 9 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Merge to TripAdvisor, which only has passing mentions about FlipKey. The topic has borderline notability, and a merge will improve the TripAdvisor article, providing more context. North America1000 00:47, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
 * FlipKey passes Notability. There is enough information from the sources for a standalone article. Contrary to what editors say above, there is much negative material about FlipKey. Sources have information like: "Given these terms, the Haggler would be reluctant to rent from FlipKey, which is owned by TripAdvisor. But what gives the Haggler real pause is that the Better Business Bureau currently gives the company an F rating, along with an average customer review of 1.01 out of five stars." And: "Cons: Lodgings not inspected. A booking fee may be required. No concierge service." Cunard (talk) 01:08, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
 * In that case, the sole "criticism" would still actually violate the specific policy WP:Wikipedia is not a travel guide, since this isn't the place to host whatever the customer ratings were; the only best place for that is either the relevant travel agency or the company website. Also, not only given the other policies against the clear promotionalism, but this one criticism wouldn't be enough to outweigh it. SwisterTwister   talk  03:58, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * The current article is a blatant violation of policies WP:What Wikipedia is not, WP:Indiscriminate and WP:Not guide so as such, the content cannot be kept if still promotional in both weight and form. No guideline can supersede a policy supporting deletion of objectionable content. Also WP:V given there's questions about independent information. SwisterTwister   talk  02:26, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Winged Blades Godric  04:01, 10 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep - The first version of this article was sourced only to the company website, and was deleted. This one is a total rewrite, and contains only plain facts, not all flattering to the company, with every single statement verified with a reference.  Most of these references were added by me, and I tried mightily to avoid press releases.  If a couple slipped by, they can be removed. There are plenty of news reports and books out there - I've added six more.  I found a couple of news items which came out since I edited the article last year, and used them to expand it a bit.&mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 14:34, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Merge into TripAdvisor. - GretLomborg (talk) 21:19, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
 * There's an an obvious merge. We are neither a vehicle for advertising nor consumer complaints. References that are one or the other do not contribute to notability -- nqd are not really RSs for any purpose.  DGG ( talk ) 05:35, 18 July 2017 (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.