Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/World ventures


 * 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. –Juliancolton Talk  ·  Review  17:35, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

World ventures

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

The too-long, don't-wanna-read summary: Fails WP:N and WP:V. The one source given is completely unreliable, and no reliable sources can be found.

The long version: No reliable sources. The magazine that is mentioned writes about one direct-sale/multi-level-marketing company a month, and states flatly: "Direct selling companies are enjoying record recruiting numbers by utilizing VideoPlus Publishing's newsstand and non-newsstand magazines and custom publications. This success is due to the publications' third-party credibility, emphasis on opportunity and thorough highlighting of the featured company's history of success and the lifestyles of successful representatives... Success from Home offers no competing or business opportunity ads and no subscriptions. As a third party publication, it offers instant credibility to your company."  In other words, the magazine exists to pull people into MLM companies and isn't a reliable source by any stretch of the imagination. (The implication is that companies featured in Success from Home pay to be in the magazine.) I searched regarding World Ventures and haven't found any reliable sources to use to make an article. The unreliable sources I found (weblogs, travel agent forums, and similar sites) all state that World Ventures is what's called a "card mill", which means that it's not considered a legitimate travel agency in any case. Flopsy Mopsy and Cottonmouth (talk) 22:08, 20 March 2009 (UTC) 
 * Delete No significant coverage in reliable sources. Fails WP:Corp and quite a lot else besides. AngoraFish   木  11:18, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton Tropical  Cyclone  00:02, 25 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete - Google finds some coverage, but not of a good kind; apart from their own web-sites, it seems from pages like this and this that it is an MLM (multi-level marketing aka pyramid-selling) scheme. JohnCD (talk) 11:49, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, vanityscamspamcruft, Red flags of non-notability. Bearian (talk) 14:30, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nomination. MLM with no reliable sources. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 14:47, 26 March 2009 (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.