Talk:Meesho

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Articles for creation

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted from this draft on 26 August 2023 by reviewer DoubleGrazing (talk · contribs).

Apps Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Apps, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of apps 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.AppsWikipedia:WikiProject AppsTemplate:WikiProject Appsapps articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Contribute to the project:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Good article nominations : Improve Application software, Facebook and Instagram to good article status
Stubs : Category:Mobile game stubs, Category:Stub-Class apps articles

Companies Low‑importance

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.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles

Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

India Low‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WP:THREE for Meesho[edit]

Hello,

I would like to request for WP:THREE

There are many references available and I am not an expert but I think these three are good references:

These are membership articles but readable if cancelled before loading 100% and a few other tricks. I have used CRED and UNACADEMY as referenced Indian companies for formatting.

Meesho is India's third largest e-commerce company and one of the most downloaded shopping apps in the world. I have read WP:CORPDEPTH and I think Meesho has been overviewed, commented, studied, discussed, analysed, evaluated many times by reputed newspapers. I have tried to put relevant references in the draft but there are many references to go through.

Please share your opinion. Thank you! Everbethesame (talk) 00:41, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I would not consider Mint a reliable enough source for WP:ORGCRIT and the Business Standard looks like something that is more on the founder (judging basing on title alone as it is paywalled). The WSJ reference looks okay. My concern on the draft would be the promotional tone ("primarily focused on digitising unorganized retail and runs a tech-led asset-light model where it doesn't own inventory, warehouses or logistics").--CNMall41 (talk) 08:17, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also, please see WP:REFBOMB. I would remove any unnecessary reference as showing notability is about the quality of the sourcing, not quantity. --CNMall41 (talk) 08:19, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @CNMall41:, thanks for the feedback. You are right, I had doubts regarding the promotional content. I have removed it now + some repetitive references. Mint is the sister website of Hindustan Times, a very famous and reputed newspaper in India. There are many references, but I am unable to choose the best ones. I had somehow managed to view Business Standard's article but I am unable to find its alternative link for now.

Still, if you were to Google Meesho, there are many many references from good websites. It seems like Wiki editors usually work on live articles, so I believe once the article is accepted, editors will automatically improve the page with time. Or is it that the company is not eligible at all despite being the 3rd largest e-commerce in India? CRED and UNACADEMY are some similar companies I used for understanding the format, especially Cred is filled with funding references which I removed from Meesho earlier upon suggestions from previous reviewers. Please review this draft again. Everbethesame (talk) 22:53, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi CNMall41, I added another source I found. It is from Forbes India: How Meesho's big, bold bets took it close to $5-billion valuation at lightning speed Everbethesame (talk) 21:48, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what you mean by "again." I never reviewed this draft. I was asked to opine about THREE which I did. I will leave this to other reviewers as your editing behavior raises suspicion and I would likely be biased when reviewing. --CNMall41 (talk) 04:15, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Request for opinion[edit]

@HighKing hello. I know you do not like articulate in AFC but you voted for delete on this when it came up at AFD last time. I found your submission the most persuasive out all of them. Do you think enough has changed in terms of coverage over the last 10 months that you would vote keep if this was approved by me and sent back to AFD? How would you vote? This is a polarised decision for me. It’s either approve to main or permanently reject. The WSJ article does look really good to me. I’m considering an approve. Would like your view though as I’ve seen you around many times at NCORP discussions and respect your opinion. — MaxnaCarta ( 💬 • 📝 ) 07:49, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Where's the link to the WSJ article? HighKing⁺⁺ 09:59, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The page was rewritten so the link was removed. MrAnmol (talk) 14:55, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Found it. I added it as the 6th reference. MrAnmol (talk) 14:57, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The company was also named among the TIME100 MOST INFLUENTIAL COMPANIES 2023 (https://time.com/collection/time100-companies-2023/6285212/meesho/) @HighKing @MrAnmol Everbethesame (talk) 16:48, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unsettling[edit]

One unsettling thing is that there is still a draft of this site when there should have a main space already by 2021 and no one went bold about it. Another one is that there have been several absurd edits by the maker and other might as well, the deleted page got protection and then nothing happened lol. I have read some comments and kind of shocked to observe how some senior editors do not weigh the subjects much that are not based in their country. It can be understood around some circumstances like if I do not know anything regards the subject, how can I know if it is notable, but I the contrast here is too much.

Recently, I came across pages about some very big ships in Washington. Of course something that people form other countries or even other states of US may not know about. However, those ships are notable enough to have different pages.

In a nutshell, I think this page now should be moved. And still, if you think it needs some improvements, I would say YOU just do it instead commenting big explanations to the writer not very experienced (am I doing the same here?). It can save time and would tell the inexperienced editor how do we do it.
>>please assume a smiley face here
Thanks! MrAnmol (talk) 15:45, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

AfC review[edit]

Well, I expect this'll be controversial no matter which way I jump, so I probably better put my rationale in writing...

I note the very long and very dodgy edit history involving likely COI (both +ve and –ve) editing, socking, and other unsavoury behaviour, which is obviously far from an auspicious genesis, but probably best regarded as water under the bridge.

I have also seen some rather negative remarks about this business, both in this draft's edit comments as well as on social media (LinkedIn, Twitter), but I don't believe it is our job to take sides, let alone censor articles based on such rumours and innuendo.

Furthermore, I note that this has been previously deleted at least five times, including once following this AfD in early 2022.

That said, I believe any earlier problems with promotional language have been rectified, and the draft, while not perfect, is now written in a reasonably neutral manner. (Judging by Primefac's log comments, this is probably because the draft has been rewritten. For that reason, publishing this now would presumably no longer come under G4 speedying?)

Many of the sources are primary, or routine business reporting, or obviously based on the company's press releases etc. However, I believe the following references are enough in both quality and quantity to satisfy WP:GNG / WP:ORGCRIT (– albeit only just):

TechInAsia (#2)
WSJ (#6)
Forbes India (#7) (NB: this is staff writing, not WP:FORBESCON)
(Additionally, the Business Standard piece (#13) is probably just about okay.)

I actually came here expecting to reject the draft, as it has been declined five times previously, but having spent, frankly, far too much time and effort reviewing it, I'm now ready to conclude that it should instead be accepted.

As the title is protected, I'm kindly requesting the protecting admin Tamzin to unprotect it. I'm also pinging other admins who have previously deleted earlier versions, in case they wish to comment, or unprotect in lieu of Tamzin: Ponyo, Star Mississippi, Liz and Sdrqaz.

Naturally, if anyone wants to dispute my proposed acceptance, I'm happy to be corrected. TIA either way, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:37, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @DoubleGrazing. I said I would unsalt if asked to by an AfC reviewer, so I have now done so. This does not represent any analysis of my own of the page's suitability for mainspace; I defer to you. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 15:47, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you @Tamzin, and fair enough! :) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:51, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I saw this too late, but essentially ditto @Tamzin. @DoubleGrazing if you believe the issues have been addressed, I have zero doubt they have been. Thanks to all who have improved it.

I can't even begin to find all the prior discussions, but if someone thinks they should be logged here-feel free. Star Mississippi 16:27, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am an AfC reviewer. I made some edits to the article after it was moved to mainspace. I had no prior knowledge of the company, but it is clearly notable in my opinion. I concur with DoubleGrazing's acceptance.--FeralOink (talk) 06:50, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]