Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zoom Vacations


 * 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. Spartaz Humbug! 22:35, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Zoom Vacations

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:GNG\WP:NCORP. Kleuske (talk) 18:14, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Kleuske (talk) 18:14, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Kleuske (talk) 18:14, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 18:32, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 18:32, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 18:32, 3 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete fails WP:CORP. gets passing mentions in gnews, mainly advertorial. LibStar (talk) 01:12, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep, I think the point of WP:BASIC is that there needs to be a way to account for subjects that have enough non-trivial coverage to amount to substantial coverage. WP:NCORP rules out non-notable awards as passing mentions that amount to trivial coverage. However, if we deem these awards to be notable in the field, then the subject probably passes BASIC.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 01:42, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep meets GNG especially when non-English sources are added in. I did see a lot of advertorial coverage but I expect that with all travel companies. Gleeanon409 (talk) 16:06, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Adverts do not convey notability. Care to share the significant coverage you have found? It may improve the article. Kleuske (talk) 16:11, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Well, here’s a link to at least a dozen. I suspect that they are so well regarded that every LGBTQ travel site that isn’t direct competition will have coverage on them. Gleeanon409 (talk) 17:29, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Those are basically adverts, based on info provided by the company themselves, a.k.a. churnalism. They even get the foto credits. That’s hardly the kind of significant coverage in reliable, independent sources, CORPDEPTH calls for. Kleuske (talk) 08:39, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * But they do help meet GNG. Gleeanon409 (talk) 12:02, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Actually, no they don't just as you can't substitute a bucket of broken glass for the lack of one large piece. Graywalls (talk) 10:16, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment. So far I’ve found:
 * Tour of the week:
 * Most are brief mentions, however they can yield some content to build a good article meeting GNG. This is also an older entertainment company so much of the coverage they got was never online so that shouldn’t be held against them. In their field they seem to be highly regarded. Gleeanon409 (talk) 12:02, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * comment All of those Out Traveler would collectively considered ONE SOURCE, and it's not totally an independent source especially if Zoom Vacations has a business relationship with the publication as an advertiser. NBC only has a trivial mention. See WP:MULTSOURCES. Graywalls (talk) 10:35, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Tour of the week:
 * Most are brief mentions, however they can yield some content to build a good article meeting GNG. This is also an older entertainment company so much of the coverage they got was never online so that shouldn’t be held against them. In their field they seem to be highly regarded. Gleeanon409 (talk) 12:02, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * comment All of those Out Traveler would collectively considered ONE SOURCE, and it's not totally an independent source especially if Zoom Vacations has a business relationship with the publication as an advertiser. NBC only has a trivial mention. See WP:MULTSOURCES. Graywalls (talk) 10:35, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Tour of the week:
 * Most are brief mentions, however they can yield some content to build a good article meeting GNG. This is also an older entertainment company so much of the coverage they got was never online so that shouldn’t be held against them. In their field they seem to be highly regarded. Gleeanon409 (talk) 12:02, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * comment All of those Out Traveler would collectively considered ONE SOURCE, and it's not totally an independent source especially if Zoom Vacations has a business relationship with the publication as an advertiser. NBC only has a trivial mention. See WP:MULTSOURCES. Graywalls (talk) 10:35, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Tour of the week:
 * Most are brief mentions, however they can yield some content to build a good article meeting GNG. This is also an older entertainment company so much of the coverage they got was never online so that shouldn’t be held against them. In their field they seem to be highly regarded. Gleeanon409 (talk) 12:02, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * comment All of those Out Traveler would collectively considered ONE SOURCE, and it's not totally an independent source especially if Zoom Vacations has a business relationship with the publication as an advertiser. NBC only has a trivial mention. See WP:MULTSOURCES. Graywalls (talk) 10:35, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Most are brief mentions, however they can yield some content to build a good article meeting GNG. This is also an older entertainment company so much of the coverage they got was never online so that shouldn’t be held against them. In their field they seem to be highly regarded. Gleeanon409 (talk) 12:02, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * comment All of those Out Traveler would collectively considered ONE SOURCE, and it's not totally an independent source especially if Zoom Vacations has a business relationship with the publication as an advertiser. NBC only has a trivial mention. See WP:MULTSOURCES. Graywalls (talk) 10:35, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Most are brief mentions, however they can yield some content to build a good article meeting GNG. This is also an older entertainment company so much of the coverage they got was never online so that shouldn’t be held against them. In their field they seem to be highly regarded. Gleeanon409 (talk) 12:02, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * comment All of those Out Traveler would collectively considered ONE SOURCE, and it's not totally an independent source especially if Zoom Vacations has a business relationship with the publication as an advertiser. NBC only has a trivial mention. See WP:MULTSOURCES. Graywalls (talk) 10:35, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Most are brief mentions, however they can yield some content to build a good article meeting GNG. This is also an older entertainment company so much of the coverage they got was never online so that shouldn’t be held against them. In their field they seem to be highly regarded. Gleeanon409 (talk) 12:02, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * comment All of those Out Traveler would collectively considered ONE SOURCE, and it's not totally an independent source especially if Zoom Vacations has a business relationship with the publication as an advertiser. NBC only has a trivial mention. See WP:MULTSOURCES. Graywalls (talk) 10:35, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Most are brief mentions, however they can yield some content to build a good article meeting GNG. This is also an older entertainment company so much of the coverage they got was never online so that shouldn’t be held against them. In their field they seem to be highly regarded. Gleeanon409 (talk) 12:02, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * comment All of those Out Traveler would collectively considered ONE SOURCE, and it's not totally an independent source especially if Zoom Vacations has a business relationship with the publication as an advertiser. NBC only has a trivial mention. See WP:MULTSOURCES. Graywalls (talk) 10:35, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
 * comment All of those Out Traveler would collectively considered ONE SOURCE, and it's not totally an independent source especially if Zoom Vacations has a business relationship with the publication as an advertiser. NBC only has a trivial mention. See WP:MULTSOURCES. Graywalls (talk) 10:35, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * keep When googling a found multiple uses of the term in news articles. https://www.forbes.com/sites/loisaltermark/2020/04/10/these-dream-destination-backgrounds-turn-your-zoom-into-a-tropical-vacation/, https://www.businessinsider.com/travel-themed-zoom-backgrounds. Both of these articles elaborate how this has become a trend and are from reputable sources. This is also a very current and timely topic that people may be googling. dscotty26 (talk) 18:21, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * comment see Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources. Forbes CONTRIBUTORS are not considered a reliable source. Business Insider is undetermined, but that is about Zoom app and vacation and has NOTHING to do with Zoom Vacations the company. Graywalls (talk) 10:24, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 04:16, 10 May 2020 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Note: See also Articles for deletion/Bryan Herb; that article is about the "co-owner, and chief marketing officer" of Zoom Vacations, and chair of International LGBTQ+ Travel Association. --Closeapple (talk) 04:17, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete run of the mill boutique travel agency. WP:MILL, WP:NCORP. News paper running articles about traveling during recession. That's not really all that unusual. Graywalls (talk) 16:49, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 03:05, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete Per above comment above relist note. KidAd (talk) 03:16, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete None of the references meet the criteria for establishing notability, topic fails WP:GNG/WP:NCORP.  HighKing++ 18:07, 20 May 2020 (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.