Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hogg Robinson Group

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. Sr13 03:04, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hogg Robinson Group

Hogg Robinson Group (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

This is a company advertising its service and history. Wikipedia clearly states that companies should not do this and indeed this article should be deleted as it infringes the guidelines of content for wikipedia. GordonRimmer 13:18, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

  • Rather obvious speedy keep; meets WP:CORP by miles and miles. Needs a rewrite, but that's what {{cleanup}} is for. Very, very notable (150 years old, operates in 100 countries, £300m turnover -- all from their 2007 annual statement). Nominator has made no edits except to create this AfD. --DeLarge 14:15, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. Today Hogg Robinson Group is an award-winning international corporate services company. . . I gather that this is some kind of travel agency that for whatever reason chooses to hide its actual business behind a fuzz of vague abstractions to put on a show of hypermodernity and omnicompetence. The business may well meet WP:CORP, but this article like this needs to be rewritten from the beginning in encyclopedic style. - Smerdis of Tlön 14:24, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Rewrite so rewrite--or at least stubbify. anyone can do that. DGG (talk) 16:03, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment - I would usually say Blatant Advertising - Delete - but the article does seem to assert some notability and so therefore should be rewritten. Onnaghar (sch-peak) 16:10, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment. Since it does seem that the business is notable, I have tried to rewrite the article to be more concrete and specific and more neutral in tone. The information in it was largely redacted or translated from what was originally there. - Smerdis of Tlön 17:01, 27 July 2007 (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.