This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This page is not unambiguously promotional, because... Rocket Internet is a big thing and deleting the page would be foolish. If this seems like promotion, let it stay and catch up to people's edits. I myself was looking for data when I stumbled onto the page. I am not a wiki writer but it just seems odd to me that such a page is listed for deletion.
I fail to see relevance of the following part: In 2011, 20 of the then-130 employees left Rocket Internet at the same time. According to media coverage at the time, the reason for this string of layoffs was “bad quality of new products” and a “gruff manner” towards employees in the course of Rocket Internet’s expansion into a “large corporation”. The former Rocket Internet managers subsequently went on to found the incubator Project A Ventures with help from the Otto Group.
New employees are joining all companies at all times. Are we supposed to mention all staff news. Employees also leave companies. Thats normal business. I can´t see this content as "controversial" or even relevant. Especially the last part: The former Rocket Internet managers subsequently went on to found the incubator Project A Ventures with help from the Otto Group. seems even more random. Why should it be mentioned, where former managers are going ? It doesn´t make sense.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 17:58, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia follows the sources. If they found it notable, why shouldn't we. WP:UNDUE is an exception, but follows consensus; it is not unilateral, as your repeated removal of content. Brianhe (talk) 05:21, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia follows relevant sources. If its done in a high quality manner. The sources used for the disputed passages are all blogs. And again, I can´t see the importance of mentioning a new firm created by former Rocket Internet staff. There are hundreds of business news sources out there which could find entry here. Blogs are certainly not credible. Its chitchat. Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 13:05, 13 October 2015 (UTC)