Talk:Ambassadors Group

BookRags was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 2 September 2017 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Ambassadors Group. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ambassadors Group article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

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

United States: Washington / Eastern Washington Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Washington.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Washington - Eastern Washington task force.

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

Business Low‑importance

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles 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.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

“BookRags is a subsidiary of Ambassadors Group so should be discussed here.”

Discussed, perhaps, but right now the article is damned near a coatrack. BookRags had an independent existence before being acquired by the subject, and has one since the cetral business of the subject collapsed. This should nor simply be a redirect. Qwirkle (talk) 17:08, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it is unreasonable to devote a section of Ambassadors Group's article to BookRags, a subsidiary of Ambassadors Group before Ambassadors Group became defunct. Ambassadors Group certainly can be expanded to discuss its other subsidiaries and other activities.

Cunard (talk) 04:07, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That’s a bit of a straw man. The question isn’t whether it is it is reasonable to devote a section to this, but whether it is correct to leave the article on BookRags, in toto, buried in a redirect. Qwirkle (talk) 13:03, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

...and a redirect to a defunct company, to boot. Qwirkle (talk) 17:42, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding "whether it is correct to leave the article on BookRags, in toto, buried in a redirect", I would have preferred to have left BookRags as a standalone article but the consensus at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BookRags (2nd nomination) was against a standalone article and was for a merge. Given that a standalone article was rejected and given that BookRags was a subsidiary of the now-defunct Ambassadors Group, I do think it is reasonable to devote a section of this article to BookRags. Cunard (talk) 04:32, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]