Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 20:41, 22 July 2024

This article was nominated for deletion on 13 March 2019. The result of the discussion was keep.

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

Companies Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Misplaced Pages. 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 Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Companies To-do: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Misplaced Pages: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: Mumbai Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Mumbai (assessed as Mid-importance). This article was last assessed in April 2012. An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article. Wikipedians in Mumbai may be able to help! International relations Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Comments

The tone of the article is highly inconsistent, and some parts sound like corporate PR material (e.g., "History"), while other parts, especially "Criticism and Controversies", are written in a much more matter-of-fact, Misplaced Pages style. --Masiello Fer09 (talk) 13:05, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

This is not an advertisment, but basic factual information. The objective of wikipedia is to make available information about an organisation with references. This page is supported by substantial external refernces.

Have incorporated changes in the layout as per wikipedia guidelines. Trust this is in order now.

As suggested, added more internal reference links. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smoothtie (talk • contribs) 09:42, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

The article looks like a completely biased advertisement of private monopolist corporation who has contracts with governments to process private data. ISCIX-Ex (talk) 00:48, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Recurrent deletions

This article is being consistently high jacked by the employees of VFS Global to remove any objective information and facts that may seem negatively affect their image. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AChakra California (talk • contribs) 15:29, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

There does seem to be recurrent attempts by anonymous editors to delete any and all criticism of VFS Global. If the deletions continue, perhaps we might ask an administrator to protect the page? -- Flask (talk) 10:50, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

More information needed about VFS Global

This is a pretty important company. They have an absolutely key position in allowing people to travel between countries, and thus can affect the lives of many people to a large degree. The company manages non-judgmental and administrative tasks related to applications for visa, passport, identity and citizen services for its client governments, enabling them to focus entirely on the critical task of assessment. The company has no influence on jurisdiction of visa process.

This company is subject to criticism, as most companies are, and it is imperative for the sake of objectivity that there remain a criticism section on this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AChakra California (talk • contribs) 15:48, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

I don't have any actual sources, but from my personal experience, and anecdotally from other people I've spoken to, this company is extremely inefficient, and frequently makes it an awfully painful experience to get any visa through them.

I now hear that in UK they have a monopoly on charging all non-UK citizens to get a Schengen (European) visa, and are now making their lives hell, too.

How did they even get these contracts from national governments in the first place? This doesn't seem right -- there is a story here waiting to be uncovered.

There seems to be a massive lack of information about who runs the company, how they manage it (poorly), and exactly what is their position and what are they responsible for. It would be great if they got some public attention and/or competition for their role, which might force them to improve their performance.

The problem is probably compounded by the fact that many of their customers may not be tech-savvy or speak english very well, so won't be able to self-organise or get their points across.

What information do people have? Can we add some sources here, perhaps links to articles written about VFS global or other good sources? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.254.146.140 (talk)

Non-free material

The lede section contains extensive copy/paste copyright violations from various pages at the VFS Global website, for example this one. This material should be rewritten and sourced to third-party reliable sources. --Tgeairn (talk) 02:51, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:VFS Global/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Last edited at 16:36, 20 April 2012 (UTC). Substituted at 09:45, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 October 2019

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please add this line to the opening summary: As of October 2019, VFS Global has a score of 1.5 out of 5 stars on Trustpilot. Update to October 2019 (still 1.5 stars). Please include a time-line of trust pilot rating. AcademiaRyan (talk) 09:42, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

 Not done. It's already included in the Criticism section. The lead already has a summary of criticism; there's no apparent need to single out this one statistic there. As far as a timeline, you need to provide exactly what you'd want to add. However, this seems like it would be excessive detail not worth including anyway. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 14:36, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Need update

VFS Global had merged with Kuoni Travel Holding (a holding company that sold all the travel services business. i.e. no relation to all licensee and operator of "Kuoni Travel"). The parent company is EQT Partners as of January 2019.

• https://kuoni.com/background.html
• https://www.reuters.com/article/us-eqt-vfs-sale/eqt-to-launch-sale-of-swiss-outsourcing-company-vfs-idUSKCN1P90WU

Thus the article need update. I have no time to do so, thanks. Matthew hk (talk) 06:16, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

Referencing style

I don't see any point to use this citation style. One section is enough, not two. Especially, since there is no talk page discussion, this controversial style should not be adopted. Matthew hk (talk) 14:07, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

Rewrite tag

Since the page had been tagged for rewrite but nobody point out the problem in talk page. So, here is my comments.

Lede should be the summary of the context of the main body of text, not the place to introducing new content. So far lots of content appears only at lede. Ownership information should move to its own section.

Also, "VF Worldwide Holdings" seem not the ultimate owner of the company, as Reuters and other source had reported that private equity fund EQT Partners bought Kuoni Group, also known as Kuoni Travel Holding, in 2016, which in turn owned VFS Global . Kuoni Travel Holding and VFS Global merged in 2018, with another reporting that EQT attempted to sell VFS Global in January 2019. Based on the context of The Independent's news report, it did not sufficiently support the fact that "VF Worldwide Holdings" still the parent company of VFS Global (which it was 2009 based on statuary filing). And wiki editor may try to dig out primary source such as listed company annual report of Kuoni Group, to determine whatever "VF Worldwide Holdings" is an intermediate parent/holding company for Kuoni Group. Or, as The Independent suggested, contract was signed with "VF Worldwide Holdings" but the service was provided by VFS Global, which suggests by the news article, had some shady practice in it. Matthew hk (talk) 14:27, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

The rewrite/neutrality tag was due to anonymous editors copying and pasting in P.R. fluff pieces from the VFS Global website. Most of that problematic content was removed so the tag can be removed now. However, yes, I agree the article still needs a major rewrite. Flask (talk) 19:48, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Removing neutrality issue tag

I am removing the neutrality template warning as the particular objections were resolved a year ago. The neutrality template was added on 4 April 2019 by Dusti due to objections about sections which heavily drew upon VFS Global's corporate press releases. At that time, the entire article read like a glowing puff piece for VFS Global. This particular issue was resolved by admin JzG's deletion of the corporate PR content on 2 October 2019‎. Although I am removing the neutrality tag since this particular issue was resolved, it must be noted that this article has been repeatedly vandalized by anonymous IP editors who continue to delete sections unfavorable to VFS Global and continue to attempt to rewrite sections to be favorable to the company. Such recurrent behavior resulted in the article being protected (per my request) on 30 September 2019‎. This behavior may likely continue in the future and will warrant watching. — Flask (talk) 01:42, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Recent edits by Blanes tree

Hello @Blanes tree: Your edit summary states that these sections and their associated citations were removed due to unsuitable sources. Although this is true in the case of TrustPilot and SiteJabber citations, the removals of many other sources listed as reputable by Misplaced Pages do not fit this justification. Per WP:RS, both The Register and The Independent are listed as reputable sources. Also, per WP:RS, Xinhua is "considered generally reliable for factual reporting" and would be deemed acceptable in this instance. As such, why remove sources listed as reliable by WP:RS using this justification? As a result of these removals, the article has numerous broken short citations.

Next, your recent edits have converted an article written in short citation format to an inline citation format. Per WP:CITE, "articles should not undergo large-scale conversion between formats without consensus to do so." More importantly, per WP:INLINECLUTTER, since "inline references can significantly bloat the wikitext in the edit window," short citations are preferred. On these grounds, the majority of your edits need to be reverted. I will be rolling back your changes. — Flask (talk) 17:50, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

@Blanes tree: Again, you removed content from reliable sources with spurious justification. There is no copyright violation with quoting an expert from the Harper & Leapman 2007 article in The Toronto Star or with the sentences cited by Taylor 2008 in The Daily Telegraph. Furthermore, The Toronto Star is a reputable Canadian newspaper and, per WP:RS, The Daily Telegraph is listed as a reliable source. Yet you removed an entire cited paragraph and sources under this justification. I will be rolling back your changes. — Flask (talk) 18:34, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

In my latest revisions, I have retained and synthesized your prose edits while restoring the original short citations and reputable sources. This is my attempt at editorial consensus. Per WP:INLINECLUTTER, short citations are preferred to inline citations which are more susceptible to bloating, and cited content from reputable sources should not be removed on the grounds of being unreliable. — Flask (talk)

Confusing citation style that obfuscates verification

The page's citation style is utterly perplexing. As an editor and a reader I am finding it very difficult to verify this article because this referencing style is unlike anything I have seen on or off Misplaced Pages. Under references we have a list of citations many of which are repeat citations. For example Baker 2009; Goodin 2007; Shifrin 2007; Gibbs 2019. Goodin 2007; Chauke 2019; Xinhua 2019; Gibbs 2019. And Travel News Weekly 2019; Chauke 2019; Xinhua 2019. Then we have a list of works cited which uses Template:Sfn ostensibly to de-clutter the WikiText but the effect is an unwieldy reference list which negates the page's verifiability. I propose we replace this page's convoluted referencing style that repeats the same references over and over again which isn't necessary because the page doesn't cite any books. The page's references comprise online sources so it would make more sense to use template:cite web and invoke the references throughout the page then invoking the sources as and where they're needed by placing a backslash in the reference tag like so

Adopting this simpler referencing format would make it easier for the public to verify the page's contents and it would make it easier for other editors to contribute to the article.Blanes tree (talk) 19:02, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Blanes tree: You are not replying to messages directed at you on this very Talk Page about your problematic edits. First, why are you removing sources such as The Register and The Independent which are explicitly listed as reliable by WP:RSPS as unreliable?

Second, your attempts to convert an article written in popular short citation format to an inline citation format contravenes WP:CITE. Per WP:CITE, "articles should not undergo large-scale conversion between formats without consensus to do so." More importantly, per WP:INLINECLUTTER, since "inline references can significantly bloat the wikitext in the edit window," short citations are preferred.

Third, you now added a "Confusing" tag which is reserved for vague text on the unrelated grounds that you don't like the citation style. Your edit summary states the SFN citation style "is unlike anything I have seen on or off Misplaced Pages," and yet the widespread SFN citation format is used in over a hundred thousand Misplaced Pages articles, including Featured Articles.

Your personal dislike of a popular citation style and your desire to unilaterally change it without editorial consensus to inline citations is explicitly forbidden by WP:CITE. As the "Confusing" tag should not be added when an editor simply dislikes a popular citation style, I am rolling back the addition of the tag. — Flask (talk) 20:41, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

1. ^ Cite error: The named reference by placing the source name in ref tags like this was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

• C-Class company articles
• Mid-importance company articles
• WikiProject Companies articles
• C-Class India articles
• Mid-importance India articles
• C-Class India articles of Mid-importance
• C-Class Mumbai articles
• Mid-importance Mumbai articles
• C-Class Mumbai articles of Mid-importance
• WikiProject Mumbai articles
• Misplaced Pages requested photographs in Mumbai
• WikiProject India articles
• C-Class International relations articles
• Low-importance International relations articles
• WikiProject International relations articles