Talk:Airbnb/Archives/2019

HRW belongs

There was no policy-based justification for removing HRW. Not only are they an extremely respected authority on human rights issues, but they had just completed a detailed study of exactly this topic. On the contrary, SWC is just an advocacy organization making a predictable knee-jerk response. Zero^talk 09:59, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

The SWC is an extremely respected authority on antisemitism. More importantly we have the Los Angeles Times (and a whole raft of other top-notch sources) covering the SWC's statements, while the HRW bit was sourced to HRW's website - WP:UNDUE. Icewhiz (talk) 10:09, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

A HRW report on HRW's website is a perfectly valid source. Their report was covered in newspapers too, as you could have determined in 30 seconds. Zero^talk 00:39, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Spanish protests (Barcelona)

The Barcelona protests in part against Airbnb, and the legal threats and action against Airbnb by Barcelona and Madrid's government, were major news stories - much larger than anything which happened in Scotland. Seems to me this warrants inclusion in the Housing Affordability subheading of 'Controversies' subsection, or somewhere else. Barcelona is conspicuous by its absence in my opinion.148.64.26.221 (talk) 12:08, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

References

Infobox update

Hello, I'm Jakob and I work for Airbnb. I've created an account so I can suggest updates to the Wikipedia article. I've disclosed my conflict of interest on this talk page and on my profile page, and I plan to only post requests on discussion pages instead of editing them myself.

For my first request, I'm hoping to have the Key personnel part of the infobox updated:

• Nathan Blecharczyk is no longer CTO, and hasn't been for years. He's now chief strategy officer (Forbes source)
• Brian Chesky's title includes both CEO and Co-founder (Forbes source, Airbnb source)

Other C-suite leadership include :

• Belinda Johnson (COO), Fortune source, Vogue source, Airbnb source
• Dave Stephenson (CFO), TechCrunch source, Airbnb source
• Ari Balogh (CTO), CNBC source

I understand I can't rely on the Airbnb website for these updates, but wanted to share them as official confirmation in addition to better news sources like Forbes, Fortune, and TechCrunch. Can an editor review these sources and update the infobox? If I need to rephrase my request, or if you have questions, please let me know here, as I'll be watching the page. JK Airbnb (talk) 17:59, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Reply 11-APR-2019

  Edit request partially implemented  

1. ✓ Blecharczyk's role updated.
2. ✗ Chesky is already listed both under the |founders= parameter as a co-founder and the |key people= parameter as CEO.
3. ✗ Minor executives are generally not included.

Regards,  Spintendo  21:33, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Acquisitions subsection

Hi, Jakob here again with Airbnb. Thanks to User:Spintendo for assisting above.

I'd like to suggest an organizational improvement to the article's "History" section. Right now the section starts with decent prose but then quickly devolves into a string of facts. I suggest creating a subsection called "Acquisitions" to improve the article's structure and make reading easier.

I saved the "History" section's markup at User:JK Airbnb/Draft, then moved text about acquisitions into a subsection. You can see specific content moves here. I think both the "History" and "Acquisitions" sections could be improved further, but for this request I'm focusing on just moving text for organizational reasons.

If approved, can someone copy the draft markup to replace the text of the current history section? Thank you. JK Airbnb (talk) 21:46, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

@Meatsgains: I see you've participated in several discussions above. Do you have any thoughts on the organizational change I've proposed here? Thanks. JK Airbnb (talk) 20:52, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for requesting changes on the talk page given your conflict of interest. After reviewing your proposed changes, I went ahead and reorganized the page based off your draft. I'm sure there will be some who oppose but we can discuss here on the talk page. Meatsgains^(talk) 00:41, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

@Meatsgains: Thank you!JK Airbnb (talk) 18:39, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Conflating political views with facts are inappropriate

QUOTE:

“Philanthropy

In January 2017, the company offered free housing to refugees and any others not allowed into the United States as a result of Donald Trump’s Executive Order 13769, which temporarily banned refugees from the United States.[120][121]”

This statement makes no sense: ...“refugees and any others not allowed into the United States...” is contradictory to itself. Critical thinking leads me to ask: How was it possible to provide housing to people not allowed into the country? Just WHERE was this housing offered? Just outside the Mexican or Canadian borders? Nope. Border Patrol is required to allow them in. At airports and shipping ports? Nope. Same answer. So where? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.93.12.233 (talk) 20:33, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Conflating political views with facts are inappropriate

QUOTE:

“Philanthropy

In January 2017, the company offered free housing to refugees and any others not allowed into the United States as a result of Donald Trump’s Executive Order 13769, which temporarily banned refugees from the United States.[120][121]”

This statement makes no sense: ...“company offered free housing to refugees and any others not allowed into the United States ...” is contradictory to itself. Critical thinking leads me to ask: How was it possible to provide housing to people not allowed into the country? Just WHERE was this housing offered? Just outside the Mexican or Canadian borders? Nope. Border Patrol is required to allow them in. At airports and shipping ports? Nope. Same answer. So where? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.93.12.233 (talk) 20:36, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Terms of use and guest review system section

Hi, Jakob here again with Airbnb.

I'd like to suggest another organizational improvement. Some topics in "Controversies" are critical of the company, but not necessarily controversies. Being criticized by an organizer of the Unite the Right rally was not a controversy. Rather, it was a response to the company's actions based on the terms of use. I suggest moving three of the "Controversies" subsections into a new section titled "Terms of use and guest review system".

I saved the "Controversies" section's markup at User:JK Airbnb/Draft, then moved text from the "Terms of use", "Objectivity of guest review system", and "Unite the Right rally booking cancellations" subsections into the new section. With this request, I'm focusing on just moving text for organizational reasons. You can see specific content moves here.

If approved, can someone copy the draft markup to replace the text of the current controversies section? Thank you. @Meatsgains: Do you have any thoughts on this organizational change I've proposed here? JK Airbnb (talk) 16:54, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

 Done Meatsgains^(talk) 01:57, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

@Meatsgains: Thank you! JK Airbnb (talk) 21:39, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Office locations section

Hello, Jakob here again with Airbnb. I'd like to suggest an update to the article's "Office locations" section. Right now the section is outdated and sourced by a Career page on the Airbnb website. I've proposed updated text at User:JK Airbnb/Draft, using appropriate sources to the best of my knowledge.

If approved, can someone copy the draft markup to replace the text of the current history section? @Meatsgains: Do you care to take a look at the change I've proposed here? Thank you. JK Airbnb (talk) 21:56, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

 Done Meatsgains^(talk) 00:54, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Why is all this "office locations" stuff necessary? This is an encyclopedia, not an international Airbnb directory. I'd like to cut this back. I don't think we should allow a corporate shill to run roughshod over this article. Chisme (talk) 02:14, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Agree with Chisme. Actually it is ridiculous (who gives a f*ck how many square meters the Dublin office has?). It is enough to say where the headquarters are and which continents other offices are located on. About 2-3 sentences total. Zero^talk 11:07, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

@Meatsgains: Thanks again for your help. Chisme, Zero, I was just trying to update content that was inaccurate. Cut back or trim as you see fit. As far as I'm concerned you can delete the whole section, if you deem it necessary. JK Airbnb (talk) 18:43, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

I'll delete the section, as you suggest. Chisme (talk) 22:04, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Controversies in Europe

Hello, could you please change under Controversies>Housing affordability> to include the following information: "Officials in several European cities have begun increasing regulations on Airbnb to address the increase in the cost of living for locals, as well as the disturbances caused by over-tourism. In 2018, for example, Barcelona and Airbnb reached an agreement in which host data would be shared with city officials, allowing them to enforce licensing restrictions." You can site the following sources: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/04/29/the-airbnb-invasion-of-barcelona https://www.citylab.com/life/2018/06/barcelona-finds-a-way-to-control-its-airbnb-market/562187/ https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/venice-tourism-overcrowding-intl/index.html https://www.cntraveler.com/galleries/2016-06-22/places-with-strict-airbnb-laws Vagabond09 (talk) 18:10, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

 Not done for now: @Vagabond09: Please indicate which parts are being cited to which sources. —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 20:42, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Airbnb Mobile Homepage.png

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:51, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

External links section

Hi, Jakob here again with Airbnb. I'd like to suggest removing the "Inside Airbnb" link under External links. This website is not affiliated with Airbnb and sends readers to an advocacy group and for-profit entity, which goes against Wikipedia's guidelines, specifically #2 on this list that states the following:

"Any site that misleads the reader by use of factually inaccurate material or unverifiable research, except to a limited extent in articles about the viewpoints that the site is presenting."

Do other editors agree? JK Airbnb (talk) 21:44, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

This external link should probably be removed, not because it isn't "affiliated with Aribnb" but because the data cannot be verified. Meatsgains^(talk) 22:42, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

I say keep it. The site is a scholarly review of the effect of Airbnb in the New York area. It's fascinating and it offers a counterpoint to this corporate article. Oughtn't we be a little suspicious when "Jakob here again from Airbnb" suggests removing a link to a site that is critical of the company that pays him? Chisme (talk) 16:50, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Keep the link. Inside Airbnb is probably independently notable, judging from its press coverage, and their data seems more accurate than Airbnb's according to Wired's reporting.[1] Fences&Windows 22:28, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

I agree with JK Airbnb, it's unnecessary. There's already a separate article devoted to that and that's where it should go.--Buzles (talk) 04:39, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

Request to split controversies section into it's own article

There's too much coverage on the controversies to all fit into a section of this article. Because of this, I split it accordingly with a clear link to the article Airbnb controversies which i already expanded reliably sourced content on. On Wikipedia if a topic has too much coverage, it can no longer function as a subtopic of an article and requires an article devoted to that subtopic. For example we have My Lai Massacre which is separate from the Vietnam War article, even though it's clearly a subtopic of the Vietnam war. Just like that, Airbnb controversies deserves it's own article because there's way too much coverage to all fit into the Airbnb article.--Buzles (talk) 03:17, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

You moved it, creating another article, without considering whether anyone had an opinion other than yours. Things are done by consensus on Wikipedia. Chisme (talk) 05:10, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Three editors (myself included) appear to think that this forking isn't necessary. Referenced material, was lost by doing so. Plus "regulations" and "controversies" are different things.Djflem (talk) 06:44, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

I don't see any need to split this article, especially not by removing all the negative information – that does the subject a disservice. Edit warring to split it without consensus here is extremely disruptive, and should not have happened. – bradv🍁 06:51, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

I think we agree it should not have happened. Thanks Djflem for restoring. Chisme (talk) 17:18, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Supporting the reversal of the split made without consensus. AHampton (talk) 16:43, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

I agree - the page should not split however, we need to be careful to not let users just drive by and add any "controversy" that pops up in the news that day. I did some trimming awhile back from this section removing some significantly WP:UNDUE content to condense. Meatsgains^(talk) 01:35, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

What really needs cleaning up is the "History" section. For example, do we really need to know that "In July 2014, Airbnb became the official jersey sponsor for the Australia men's national basketball team"? Somebody from Airbnb tooted their horn all over this article. Chisme (talk) 21:46, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

I've trimmed some of the WP:UNDUE and promotional content but it could probably use some more work. Meatsgains^(talk) 02:25, 12 December 2019 (UTC)