476:. I (independently) agree with DES (except I didn't actually see the 14 Sept version). My quick hunt for sources did not immediately surface enough substantive and independent enough to overturn, but the recent (since 14 Sept) closed funding round and size of company make me strongly suspect it will attract that attention soon. So -- unless someone points out significant RS sources now -- I don't think we can overturn yet, but it's worth working on if someone wants to. The prior COI issues will require some care before moving to main space, but previous COI does not mean others without a COI can't take over.
426:, I do not have any connections to Next Insurance. I virtually know one of the VPs, as I listen to his Podcast, but I don't know him personally. I never worked for the company, they never offered me a job and I never applied for a job there. I do not get paid by Next Insurance or anyone else. I never got anything for editing other than the joy of contributing to Knowledge or helping others. For many years I've contributed to the Hebrew Knowledge and I was, and still am, an advocate against paying editors or self-promotion.
188:, has recently asked to recover the article. This user works for the company and MER-C has raised concerns that the article would not be reliable and independent. I also understand the problem with covert advertising and using Knowledge as a platform for this. However, the company is now significant and has a lot of coverage, so I believe it makes sense to consider it again.
453:. Technically, DRV permission is not needed for this, as the title is protected only in the main article space, as far asa i can see. But I think it would add comfort for both the creating editor and any possible AfC reviewer if we did explicitly confirm that permission. However the various deletions should be
448:
Lookin g at the version from 14 September 2020, that was largely supported by sources that were either not indepndent (based on interviews and press releases) not reliable (from a Forbes contributor, not staff), not including substantial coverage, or a mix of those. That version should certainly not
492:
Thanks for all the comments. After I read the old article and I compeltly agree that it was written almost as an ad. I will write a new draft and keep it in my userspace, then I'll submit it for review. No need to continue the discussion as I agree that the old article should not be recovered (that
368:
without any special permission. It is true that if a reviewer were to approve it, that reviewer would need to be, or get help from, and admin to move it to article space. It is also true that some AfC reviewers will not approve an article if the title is protected in the main article space. If this
283:
says to
Endorse, or Keep Deleted, and I agree if this is a request to undelete, but it isn't clear what is being asked. Is this an appeal of the G11, to undelete the original delete article? No way. Is this a request to unsalt, to allow re-creation? That is what I am guessing it is, but that
306:
I request to move deleted article to my userspace, let me edit it and make sure it stands in the standards of notability, and then submit the draft for review. I actually don't know if the previous user that edited the article was paid or not, but this user will not be related to my attempt to
284:
would bypass the issue of covert advertising by permitting open advertising instead. The title is currently salted in article space, but is not salted in draft space. The paid editor is already free to create a draft and submit it for review. If the reviewer agrees that it passes
176:
raised over 600 million USD. The company has multiple significant, independent, and reliable coverage by the media, which makes it suitable candidate to join the article space again. I would like to work on this article and fix it so it would be able to return to the article space.
171:
This article was published when the company was young and failed the notability test. I can't see the history of this article, but as far as I understand, it was poorly written without sufficient citations. The company grow significantly since then and is now considered to be a
385:
So right after I opened a new draft for the article, it was already tagged as potential self promotion. I understand the fear, but I only opened the article's draft in my userspace and started to fill the infobox details. This doesn't make any sense.
242:, Thanks for the comment. I added some references for the notability. I'm not sure why in your view the size of the company works against it. Furthermore, similar companies have articles about them (
402:
Versions of this article were created by at least two different editors (or at least two different accounts) now both blocked. At least one additional now blocked account edited it. Do you,
346:
The relevant user is not in the picture. I want to create this article as a draft and submit it for review, but as far as I understand I need to get a permission first because it was salted.
449:
be restored to the main article space, nor anything similar to that version. However, I think it likely that this company either is, or soon will become, notable. Thefoe I suggest that we
195:, as I listen to his Podcast, but another than that I'm not connected in any way shape or form to Next Insurance, and I have no personal or commercial/financial interest to help.
48:
34:
43:
369:
discussion were to approve your doing so, you could link to it and that might help convince a reviewer to consider a draft on its own merits.
147:
406:
have any connection with the company or any of those previous editors? In particular, are you being paid by Next
Insurance in any way?
39:
162:
463:
412:
375:
21:
512:
333:
293:
97:
17:
502:
485:
468:
435:
417:
395:
380:
355:
337:
316:
297:
267:
230:
204:
86:
365:
243:
117:
498:
494:
431:
427:
403:
391:
387:
361:
351:
347:
329:
312:
308:
289:
263:
259:
200:
196:
113:
70:
328:
the salting in article space, because the paid editor is still free to create and submit a draft.
226:
192:
185:
461:
410:
373:
481:
218:
285:
247:
364:
The title is not protected in draft space (or user space), and so you are free to create
74:– Deletion(s) endorsed. Editors are free to create a new draft and submit it to review.
280:
255:
239:
222:
214:
77:
458:
423:
407:
370:
493:
wasn't what I asked for anyways...). Thanks again for your time and comments. Best
477:
181:
251:
173:
288:, then and only then can we consider unsalting in article space.
184:
deleted it and marked it as covert advertising. Another user,
154:
140:
132:
124:
474:
Endorse deletion, allow creation of draft and evaluate
451:
allow creation of a new version in draft or uerspace
457:, without prejudice to a new and better version.
279:- What is being appealed or requested here?
8:
221:, which explains the persistent promotion. —
96:The following is an archived debate of the
63:
7:
213:. No sign that this company passes
515:of the page listed in the heading.
191:Full disclosure, I virtually know
28:
174:List_of_unicorn_startup_companies
511:The above is an archive of the
503:06:48, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
486:03:15, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
469:16:30, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
436:10:51, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
418:16:13, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
396:10:51, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
381:16:13, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
356:01:51, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
338:01:26, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
317:01:50, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
298:01:26, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
268:01:50, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
231:00:49, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
205:22:20, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
1:
360:That is not quite correct,
87:20:45, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
538:
18:Knowledge:Deletion review
518:Please do not modify it.
103:Please do not modify it.
40:Deletion review archives
180:As far as I understand
307:recreate the article.
244:Root Insurance Company
211:Endorse (keep deleted)
366:Draft:Next Insurance
286:corporate notability
100:of the page above.
525:
524:
465:DESiegel Contribs
414:DESiegel Contribs
377:DESiegel Contribs
219:Unicorn (finance)
85:
59:26 September 2020
49:2020 September 27
35:2020 September 25
529:
520:
167:
165:
157:
143:
135:
127:
105:
84:
82:
75:
64:
53:
33:
537:
536:
532:
531:
530:
528:
527:
526:
516:
513:deletion review
466:
415:
378:
330:Robert McClenon
290:Robert McClenon
248:Hippo_(company)
161:
159:
153:
152:
146:
139:
138:
131:
130:
123:
122:
101:
98:deletion review
78:
76:
62:
55:
54:
51:
46:
37:
31:
26:
25:
24:
12:
11:
5:
535:
533:
523:
522:
507:
506:
491:
489:
488:
471:
464:
445:
444:
443:
442:
441:
440:
439:
438:
413:
400:
399:
398:
376:
341:
340:
322:
321:
320:
319:
301:
300:
281:User:SmokeyJoe
273:
272:
271:
270:
256:Lemonade, Inc.
240:User:SmokeyJoe
234:
233:
169:
168:
150:
144:
136:
128:
120:
114:Next Insurance
108:
107:
92:
91:
90:
89:
71:Next Insurance
61:
56:
47:
44:2020 September
38:
30:
29:
27:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
534:
521:
519:
514:
509:
508:
505:
504:
500:
496:
487:
483:
479:
475:
472:
470:
467:
462:
460:
456:
452:
447:
446:
437:
433:
429:
425:
421:
420:
419:
416:
411:
409:
405:
401:
397:
393:
389:
384:
383:
382:
379:
374:
372:
367:
363:
359:
358:
357:
353:
349:
345:
344:
343:
342:
339:
335:
331:
327:
324:
323:
318:
314:
310:
305:
304:
303:
302:
299:
295:
291:
287:
282:
278:
275:
274:
269:
265:
261:
257:
253:
249:
245:
241:
238:
237:
236:
235:
232:
228:
224:
220:
216:
212:
209:
208:
207:
206:
202:
198:
194:
189:
187:
183:
178:
175:
164:
156:
149:
142:
134:
126:
119:
115:
112:
111:
110:
109:
106:
104:
99:
94:
93:
88:
83:
81:
73:
72:
68:
67:
66:
65:
60:
57:
50:
45:
41:
36:
23:
19:
517:
510:
490:
473:
454:
450:
325:
276:
210:
190:
179:
170:
102:
95:
79:
69:
58:
495:Delbarital
428:Delbarital
404:Delbarital
388:Delbarital
362:Delbarital
348:Delbarital
309:Delbarital
260:Delbarital
217:. It is a
197:Delbarital
80:Sandstein
252:Metromile
223:SmokeyJoe
455:endorsed
277:Question
193:Effifuks
186:Effifuks
20: |
478:Martinp
326:Endorse
215:WP:CORP
163:restore
133:history
182:MER-C
155:watch
148:links
52:: -->
16:<
499:talk
482:talk
432:talk
392:talk
352:talk
334:talk
313:talk
294:talk
264:talk
227:talk
201:talk
141:logs
125:edit
118:talk
32:<
459:DES
424:DES
422:Hi
408:DES
371:DES
258:).
22:Log
501:)
484:)
434:)
394:)
354:)
336:)
315:)
296:)
266:)
254:,
250:,
246:,
229:)
203:)
42::
497:(
480:(
430:(
390:(
350:(
332:(
311:(
292:(
262:(
225:(
199:(
166:)
160:(
158:)
151:|
145:|
137:|
129:|
121:|
116:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.