Draft talk:Vahdam India

Argument for notability

Greetings, I have a conflict of interest with this page since I am connected to the company. Have declared the same per policy at my user page. Please advise if something else is needed to be done. I hope that my COI would not bias reviewers' outlook and they will review without prejudice focussing only on the merit of the page per notability guidelines.

In this section, I'd argue which sources, I think contribute to notability and why. As I understand, the relevant guideline is WP:CORPDEPTH that argues 'Deep or significant coverage provides an overview, description, commentary, survey, study, discussion, analysis, or evaluation of the product, company, or organization.'

Source 1

The first source I'd like to present is [1] from Barron's where the journalist Clarissa Sebag-Montefiore provides an overview, description of the company and also analyze the company in the context of current market. There are several incidents that would justify this source meeting WP:CORPDEPTH.

Source 2

The second source is [2] from Entrepreneur India written by Punita Sabharwal, managing editor as evident here [3] and not a guest writer. Again, the piece provides a good overview and in the end also analyze it, providing factual summary in context of offline/online split and repeat customer ratio.

Source 3

The third source is a complete case study [4] published by Emerald Group Publishing and comments on Vahdanm's marketing channelisation.

The above sources, I'd understand would meet WP:THREE. That being said, I know, that for WP:CORPDEPTH, even two are considered enough if they are of high quality. There are more sources that are noteworthy and would continue to contribute to notability per WP:CORPDEPTH such as [5], [6].

The Forbes Source

I did not bring in this Forbes source [7] in my selection of WP:THREE because of the debate around reliability of Forbes. But as we see on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources, it says 'Forbes and Forbes.com include articles written by their staff, which are written with editorial oversight, and are generally reliable. This excludes articles written by Forbes.com contributors or "Senior Contributors". Forbes also publishes various "top" lists which can be referenced in articles.'

This piece is indeed written by Forbes staff and is not a listical. This piece opens an interesting business question, discusses Vahdam and also invite comments from other experts. So I'd like to present this as an additional source to consider specially when - as I just noted - Entrepreneur India is no consensus (I am surprised though).

In summary, the consortium of the sources presented above makes a good argument of notability.

Rem2024 (talk) 20:31, 26 April 2024 (UTC)