Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tibet Tourism

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Tibet Tourism

[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Tibet Tourism (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There does not appear to be any significant coverage of this company to pass WP:NCORP. The sources that were added by the article creator [1] in response to my PROD are merely company listings on other websites and not significant coverage. – notwally (talk) 23:00, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP. This is a listed company that has been on the Shanghai Stock Exchange since 1996, and there is no problem with WP:NORG (WP:LISTED). In addition, I added Western media sources such as Financial Times and Bloomberg. TinaLees-Jones (talk) 23:21, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
From the policy you cited: "There has been considerable discussion over time whether publicly traded corporations, or at least publicly traded corporations listed on major stock exchanges such as the NYSE and other comparable international stock exchanges, are inherently notable. Consensus has been that notability is not automatic in this (or any other) case. However, sufficient independent sources almost always exist for such companies, so that notability can be established using the primary criterion discussed above. Examples of such sources include independent press coverage and analyst reports. Accordingly, article authors should make sure to seek out such coverage and add references to such articles to properly establish notability." The Financial Times and Bloomberg company profiles you added are not significant coverage that would establish notability, and I have not found sources with significant coverage when trying to research this company. If these sources exist, then you should add them into the article. – notwally (talk) 23:39, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly, I believe that all Wikipedia editors are equal; therefore, the use of the term should reflects a deficiency in reasonableness and mutual trust. Secondly, this is a Chinese publicly traded corporation, and I have included extensive information in Chinese; but I would not assert that proficiency in Chinese is necessary to comprehend this material. TinaLees-Jones (talk) 00:07, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comprehension isn't the issue, lack of coverage is. We'd need stories in news media about this corporate entity, to show notability here. Oaktree b (talk) 21:42, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
TinaLees-Jones, I'm not sure what kind of non-WP:AGF nonsense you are going on about, but "should" is literally taken directly from the notability guideline you cited: "Accordingly, article authors should make sure to seek out such coverage and add references to such articles to properly establish notability." I do not see significant coverage from any of the sources you have added, including the Chinese-language citations. If any non-English sources do have significant coverage, could you please point them out? – notwally (talk) 22:48, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This article contains a substantial amount of information regarding Chinese literature, complete with Google Books sources and links. I have additionally attempted to incorporate other English literature mentioned in the article. These book sources have demonstrated their significance and relevance in comparison to web sites. I trust you will also acknowledge that the entries are more comprehensive and reflect the authors' efforts. TinaLees-Jones (talk) 23:19, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep According to WP:SIRS notability for listed companies on major exchanges (such as the Shanghai Stock Exchange) can be shown using analyst reports. Examples of in-depth analysis for this company include:
A long list of analyst reports can be found here[2] Oblivy (talk) 03:56, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Are analyst reports are the same as comments on the company's annual reports? Also, it does not appear that the list of reports you provided are all about this company. – notwally (talk) 22:48, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why are we going on about financial reports and nothing about what the company actually does day-to-day? They manage tourist sites, but how, and how does the country manage this. I'm not seeing a lot about site management, and way too much information the reader has no care about such as their rental car service and its financials or what in the Sam Hill a 'Sherpa Ram Art Performance Company' does. This is of no use to anyone traveling or being a tourist. Nate • (chatter) 23:02, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:14, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: Financial summaries don't help show notability, literally every publicly traded company will have one (its the very basic part of a robust and accountable financial system). Building an article out of these summaries doesn't prove notability, only that they haven't lied in their financial reporting. Oaktree b (talk) 21:40, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and redirect to Tourism in Tibet This article doesn't really impart any information about the company, just its mere existence, and the title is something that the average reader should expect to lead to information about general tourism in the country, not a corporate article (which...the actual offerings of the company, not its mundane stock performance or corporate mergers/transactions, should be highlighted here rather than hilariously incorrect prose like six companies constitute a solid tourism service system); if it is kept, this needs to be renamed to its full corporate name for transparency and hatnoted in Tourism in Tibet. Nate • (chatter) 23:38, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete -- per Nate's above argument(s). Additionally, strongly agree that if it is kept, some additional form of transparency AND differentiation (from Tourism in Tibet) is needed, lest Wikipedia provide "Tourism Tibet" marketing.MWFwiki (talk) 00:40, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Tibet_Tourism&oldid=1262538708"