Talk:Airbnb

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: Marcomonroy.

Archives (Index)

2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Appears promotional

I doubt the neutrality of the article. Parts of the Airbnb entry appear advertorial and promotional and give the impression that someone close to Airbnb may have edited it to let Airbnb look good. One example is some language, e.g. "almost all Airbnb experiences work out perfectly." Another example is the structure of the article, with Airbnb's insignificant sponsoring activities appearing above criticism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.41.165.40 (talk) 17:03, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Added by Cloversmate: I have to concur with this experience. Around March 2017, I edited the early section that talks about guest fees. This very early and prominent section refers to guest service fees - 'On each booking, the company charges guests a 6%-12% guest services fee and charges hosts a 3% host service fee'.

From my own research, this is clearly not true. The article replicates the info on the Airbnb website and understates the fees charges - well those in the UK market where guest fees are typically 15-16%. Really very high given that Airbnb is also charging hosts an additional fee (around 3%). Within a week or two, this extra information was deleted back to the original statement of 6-12%. It looks very likely, to me, as a professional journalist, that someone from Airbnb is editing the Wiki entry, or doing it on their behalf. BEWARE ANY INFORMATION ON THIS ENTRY - I AM VERY SURE THAT THIS WIKI ENTRY IS BEING COMMERCIALLY EDITED to make AirBnb look good. Comment added by Cloversmate 17 May 2017. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cloversmate (talk • contribs) 10:39, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

I don't think that I've read a more promotional page on Wikipedia to date. I've copy-edited it for NPOV and encyclopedic format, inviting other editors to check for NPOV. I hope it's also now more accessible to edits of individual entries (and omissions).AHampton (talk) 20:42, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

NPOV? Nature of the business model/ pattern

I think the page is a bit misleading in presenting AirBnB as a "hospitality service" like CouchSurfing or Be Welcome, social networks sharing accommodation based on reputation. AirBnB is really a catalogue and booking platform for a massive, transnational motel franchise, which accepts anyone as a franchisee, as long as they have space to rent and can operate the platform from their own device. Comparing themselves to CouchSurfing et al is their PR, not an accurate description, as is referring to Rachel Botsman's concept of 'Collaborative Consumption', without also referring to ideas like Commons-based Peer Production, which highlights the important differences between reciprocity-based sharing clubs like CouchSurfing and financially-based booking services like AirBnB. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danylstrype (talk • contribs) 15:07, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Criticism section - Facebook linkage, inadequate help

The current Criticism section is very mild/simplified. For example, it skips over the growing situation where would-be users who do not have an active Facebook (or similar) life, or do not want it entangled with their Airbnb account, are being effectively shut out of participating.

It may not be sufficiently "notable" that entire websites are devoted to Airbnb complaints. But the user feedback on fairly neutral/respectable BBB is a tidal wave of overwhelmingly negative individual experiences, with a common theme: a lot of time/money/distress is at stake in each transaction, there is a lot that can and does go wrong, and the Airbnb rules are more complex than many users understand; when users have problems they frequently cannot get timely and adequate help from Airbnb. Is there some good and appropriate way to add this to the article?

A would-be user of the service who carefully researches the situation before trying to join could reasonably conclude that the experience would be uncertain and risky in a daunting variety of ways. -71.174.175.134 (talk) 13:09, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Sounds like someone has a vendetta against the company. Bad experienced with Airbnb or what? Everthing you noted above is WP:UNDUE criticism and unless it is referenced in multiple reliable sources, it should not be added. Meatsgains (talk) 19:29, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

I think the main focus of this section should be the struggle within city/state/national governments on how to adequately regulate Airbnb to address its criticisms. As of November 2017, countless cities and local governments around the world (not just San Francisco and Scotland) are still struggling with accommodating Airbnb while also appeasing local critics. An example is San Diego, where the city attorney deemed short-term rentals illegal while the city council refuses to enforce such mandate and is trying to pass legislation allowing for short-term rentals. This struggle applies to many other local governments, and so I think a general summary of pro-Airbnb and anti-Airbnb arguments should be included. Further, Airbnb has addressed some of its criticism and now has a page for hosts with instructions on how to abide by local regulations. The current criticism section does not include any proposed solutions to the criticisms, either on Airbnb's or the government's behalf. Ultimately, I think the section should be reframed as a developing story as opposed to a list of criticisms, given that the discussion is still ongoing and new policy options are still being tested and implemented. Marcomonroy (talk) 04:57, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Crimes committed by users- Relevance

I feel like the content of this section should either be removed or edited. The paragraph lacks relevant information about the subject in question and cites newspaper articles describing sensationalist horror stories that happened to people using Airbnb. More objective and reliable data such as the number of crimes listed by city and type seems more appropriate for this section.ABBslp (talk) 21:36, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

I agree and went ahead and removed the section for being WP:UNDUE. If we are to have a section like this, it'd be very difficult to decide what is and isn't notable enough to warrant inclusion. Meatsgains (talk) 22:23, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Government actions against Airbnb and short-term rental

This section appears to be a violation of WP:Globalize. Are we going to list every city in the world that regulates Airbnb and the history of the regulations? There are thousands of cities that regulate Airbnb. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.196.163.157 (talk) 00:57, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

No they aren't that many. And we put in what is notable and sum it up like we did in that section. It can't be done better than that including various viewpoints on the regulations. With the EU section mentioned, it makes it obvious that restrictions or attempts against Airbnb have been made. Likewise in America, the story is the same. The mention of Arizona and other states banning municipalities from interfering indicates that it has been banned or restricted across various American cities.--NadirAli نادر علی (talk) 06:08, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

There are plenty. You mentioned a few cities in the U.S. as well as the EU in general. There are specific regulations for Airbnb is almost every major city in the U.S. You can write an entire article about Airbnb in New York City, but NYC is not even mentioned in this section. Several cities in Europe, such as Paris, Berlin, and Barcelona have detailed restrictions on Airbnb. And there is no mention of any of the regulations in Australia, taxes required in Mexico City, and the stringent regulations in South Korean cities. Those are just a few examples.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.196.163.157 (talk) 13:10, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Let's see how the current version of the article turns out, otherwise I'll make a proposal here, but don't do anything for now.--NadirAli نادر علی (talk) 22:26, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

"Awards" section

I don't see how winning an "app" award at SXSW or "best place to work" in the Glassdoor "employee's choice" award are important enough for this article. If you feel they are, perhaps they could be moved into the "History" section (which is a disaster of its own). power~enwiki (π, ν) 00:39, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

"Benefits" is arguably promotional but I don't care enough to argue about it. It may be worth moving it under "Overview", though. power~enwiki (π, ν) 00:39, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Makes sense to me, and I didn't add back the second award because there was no secondary source talking about. I've made the suggested edits. Saturnalia0 (talk) 21:56, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Should we include this source?

[1] can this be added to the controversies section?--NadirAli نادر علی (talk) 21:08, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

I see no reason why it can't be mentioned in the Concerns and resistance from the hotel industry subsection. Meatsgains^(talk) 02:29, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Guest review section

"Therefore, it's impossible to obtain an objective picture of the property from the reviews on Airbnb." This is opinionated and only represents some people's perspective rather than being presented as a matter of fact. To my knowledge this system has a mutual guest and host review. Or am I wrong about that?--NadirAli نادر علی (talk) 02:12, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

This also contradicts above section which states this has a mutual guest-host review system.--NadirAli نادر علی (talk) 02:15, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

I agree NadirAli, I have rewritten the section to make it more objective. The above statement was purely opinion. The review system is mutual and has some in-built mechanisms to promote accuracy and objectivity in reviews, obviously there are shortcomings which I have presented in a more factual manner. Wpcwpc (talk) 19:28, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

Safety mechanisms section has serious NOR, POV, and missiong citations issues.

The majority of the safety mechanisms section either has no citations or disingenuous citations. Highly critical statements, inferences, and conclusions regarding Airbnb are made with no support. I feel that there is a clear deviation from a neutral viewpoint and significant amounts of original research. I believe most of this section should be removed if sources cannot be found. I have added a missing citations tag, and I think a POV and NOR tag would also be appropriate. All of these statements were added two days ago by User:Igaskin. I have removed this user's contributions - they can be re-added when they have specific sources to support them. 134.223.230.152 (talk) 13:52, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

Online presence / Tech community influence

I feel like it might be of interest to provide information regarding Airbnb's influence in the software open source community. Among other things, they are responsible for Enzyme, which is a very commonly-used testing framework for React systems. They are also well-known for their JavaScript style guide, which is incredibly popular as an adopted style standard. Would this information belong in its own section? The headers I came up with for this section are "Online presence" or "Tech community influence" but I'm not sure what would be appropriate. Poplopo (talk) 19:12, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

This may be a bit WP:UNDUE. Can you find independent reliable for support? Meatsgains^(talk) 01:41, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Seems worth looking into and possibly including. AHampton (talk) 17:19, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Page protection

This page is frequently edited to remove masses of information perceived as negative, so should be protected, in my opinion. Ditto Uber... often by the same IPs. AHampton (talk) 17:19, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Legit pic or advertising?

Struck me as advertising, not sure it should be on Wikipedia... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Airbnb_app_screenshot.png AHampton (talk) 17:19, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Settlements

We have a minor edit war over how to handle the decision to remove listings. I think that section of this article should probably be viewed as included in the articles subject to Wikipedia:Arbitration/Index/Palestine-Israel articles. One factor is the range of opinion: not all Israelis support expansion of settlements, Palestinians are disappointed at the mildness of AirBnB's reasoning. I particularly noted that no Palestinian could possibly book one of those listings, a point AirBnB cited. Also, this might be a test of US and state anti-boycott laws. Human Rights Watch has not been mentioned so far. User:Fred Bauder Talk 10:43, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Airbnb did not prevent Palestinians from booking these listings, and it is inaccurate to state that "no Palestinian could possibly book one of those listings" - I can think of several circumstances in which a Palestinian could book and stay (the converse by the way (Israelis booking in Palestinian controlled cities) is not true - Israelis are not permitted, by ordinance, to enter Area A of the West Bank).Icewhiz (talk) 10:55, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

The words AirBnB used were "effectively banned." User:Fred Bauder Talk 15:21, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

A few of the listings are in illegal (according to Israel, itself) settlements on land owned by Palestinians. User:Fred Bauder Talk 18:21, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

It's ridiculous to pile on source after source that are all basically the same story in different news outlets. Do some pruning. And cut out the predictable opinion-spamming (you know who you are). Zero^talk 13:09, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

There really is excessive sourcing.Bangabandhu (talk) 15:57, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

The attempt to attribute Airbnb's decision to the BDS movement is not supported by either of the given sources. So it must go. Zero^talk 08:55, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

this source right here says airbnb caved into pressure from BDS--1.136.110.168 (talk) 21:39, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

here is bds saying it is "A Partial Victory for Human Rights & Accountability" --1.136.110.168 (talk) 21:54, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Apart from the title of the opinion piece (written by some sub-editor, which counts zero) you found only after-the-fact approvals. Zero^talk 01:42, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

We don't need quotes from pundits on either side explaining the move. Lots of people call it anti-semitic, regardless of the merit of that claim, and it is (briefly, without WP:UNDUE) reflected in the text. Bangabandhu (talk) 15:56, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

The Simon Wiesenthal center is not a "pundit" - but rather one of the leading bodies that studies antisemitism. Furthermore, it seems that the majority of coverage is focused on antisemitism - and per WP:W - we should follow that as well.Icewhiz (talk) 06:26, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

It is ok to quote criticism within modest limits but it isn't ok to quote yellow text like "names schools and shopping centers in honor of mass murderers" which is not even about the topic. And the SWC is an advocacy organization, obviously. Now there are 5 words which mention praise without saying what it is, and 72 words of explicit criticism. Please explain why you think NPOV is satisfied by this. On second thoughts, don't bother. Zero^talk 07:27, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

WP:BALASP, per continuing coverage of the topic in RS, though I agree the Palestinian response could be expanded from sources covering the airbnb decision. Icewhiz (talk) 07:40, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

I see. You added a non-Israeli response from an advocacy organization but you think only Palestinian negative responses are due. Got it. Zero^talk 10:10, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Hmm.. I think you have cut out a lot of text that was relevant Icewhiz. The section now doesn't even mention the BDS campaign, nor the legal issues surrounding the West Bank listings. The likely reason (imo) for the delisting is that the company was in breach of EU law and that the European Commission would be eligible to issue stiff fines on it. It is not WP:BALANCED that the section mentions SWC:s partisan opinion, but not BDS:s. ImTheIP (talk) 09:31, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

There was a claim that Airbnb's decision was due to pressure from the BDS movement. That should not be reinserted, because it was unsourced. Airbnb did not disclose the source of the complaints it received and we don't need speculation. The BDS movement issued a statement in support after the announcement; it is eligible for insertion but I won't. More relevant would be to cite HRW. I might do that. Zero^talk 10:10, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

I didn't remove BDS (I think!) - it got trimmed by someone else (I think!). In as much as we have reasonable sources connection the two (or claiming to connect the two) - it should go in.Icewhiz (talk) 14:02, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

You removed a quite important part here claiming it was WP:SYNTH. That Airbnb could have faced prosecution from the European Commission clearly is relevant... ImTheIP (talk) 18:18, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

clear SYNTH.Icewhiz (talk) 18:35, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

It would be SYNTH to attribute Airbnb's recent announcement to Dugard's opinion, but to simply present it as an example of criticism that Airbnb has faced over the settlements in the past would clearly be allowed. Zero^talk 01:11, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

When I inserted it last week [2] the context was clearer, but the section has changed a lot since. ImTheIP (talk) 12:09, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

Delisting of Jewish settlements

There has been a partial retraction of airbnb's policy, source. --101.173.77.164 (talk) 23:58, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

What does Airbnb mean?

Is it for Air Bed 'n' Breakfast?

There should be an explanation for the name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:16B8:4671:FA00:B82E:AD94:2D1:A983 (talk) 04:50, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

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)

Airbnb and Israel

Airbnb announced that it would end its policy prohibiting listings owned by Jews in Judea and Samaria from being listed on their platform, here is the source. --2001:8003:4163:AD00:414C:AA47:8AB0:127A (talk) 08:26, 10 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)

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)

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)

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.[3] 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)

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)

Regulations

A section about regulations imposed by municipalities, states, nations and effects on Airbnb is appropriate for this article.Djflem (talk) 13:50, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

Djflem see the article on Airbnb controversies--Buzles (talk) 02:18, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

@Buzles: Will keep the discussion here: Regulations, especially those which have an effect a business, and controversies are two different things.Djflem (talk) 06:48, 7 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)

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

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

• Airbnb Mobile Homepage.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:13, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Deaths Caused by Airbnb Rentals

I'm surprised these two deaths caused by Airbnb rentals are not listed on the Controversies section. Potential users of the Airbnb service should be aware of past incidents leading to death, and Airbnb's response to the incidents. I also find it suspicious that there are seven full-window Airbnb advertisements on that Medium.com page, perhaps as their way of monitoring how many visits the page gets.

• https://medium.com/matter/living-and-dying-on-airbnb-6bff8d600c04

“The rope swing looked inviting. Photos of it on Airbnb brought my family to the cottage in Texas. Hanging from a tree as casually as baggy jeans, the swing was the essence of leisure, of Southern hospitality, of escape. When my father decided to give it a try on Thanksgiving morning, the trunk it was tied to broke in half and fell on his head, immediately ending most of his brain activity."

"I was in bed when my mom found him. Her screams brought me down to the yard where I saw the tree snapped in two and his body on the ground. I knelt down and pulled him up by the shoulders. Blood sprayed my blue sweatshirt and a few crumpled autumn leaves. We were face-to-face, but his head hung limply, his right eye dislodged, his mouth full of blood, his tongue swirling around with each raspy breath."

"..."

"We let her down, and for that we are very sorry,” CEO Brian Chesky wrote in 2011, after a San Francisco woman, “EJ,” returned home to find her apartment destroyed, her possessions burned, and her family heirlooms stolen. When her blog post documenting the ordeal went viral, they changed their policy to guarantee $50,000, then $1 million, in property damages and hired enough customer service reps to man the phones 24–7."

"Less has been done to protect guests against hosts, presumably because fewer horror stories have gone public. When an American man was bit by a dog left behind at a homeshare in Argentina this March, Airbnb refused to cover his medical expenses until after The New York Times began inquiring."

• https://www.wired.com/2017/01/how-airbnb-stopped-playing-nice/

"On December 30, 2013, only a day before a six-year-old girl named Sophia Liu was hit and killed by an Uber driver in San Francisco, Elizabeth Eun-chung Yuh, a 35-year-old South Korean native from Ontario, Canada, died of carbon monoxide poisoning at an Airbnb in Taipei. She had traveled there with friends for a wedding and checked into an apartment downtown, where the landlord had recently enclosed an outdoor porch without properly venting the water heater or installing a carbon monoxide alarm. According to a report in the China Post, her four friends in adjacent rooms were admitted to a local hospital and treated for carbon monoxide inhalation, but Yuh was found dead at the scene."

"The Yuh family, which did not respond to my attempts to reach them, contacted San Francisco personal injury attorney William B. Smith, who advised them to file a wrongful death suit and challenge Airbnb’s 14-page terms-of-service agreement, which stated that hosts and guests assumed all risks and were responsible for adhering to local laws. But soon after, Smith told me, the Yuh family informed him that Airbnb had offered them two million dollars to resolve the matter. They decided to accept instead of filing a lawsuit."

"According to a legal paper Smith later published on his law firm’s website, Airbnb denied liability for the incident and specified that the settlement was “offered only for humanitarian reasons.” One attorney who worked for Airbnb later told me that Airbnb didn’t have to settle the case but that, in such situations, Chesky focused intently on the right thing to do. To Smith, though, any hint of benevolence rang false. “People might pay money for humanitarian reasons, but corporations don’t. They pay because of legal liabilities,” he says."

"..."

"In a joint interview with all three Airbnb co-founders, I asked about such tragedies. “There is a certain statistical probability that extremely unlikely things will happen from time to time, given enough scale,” Nate Blecharczyk answered. “It can be an opportunity actually to come out stronger. When something bad happens, we really look deep within and try to think hard about . . . what it is we can do going forward to make the service better.”"

"Indeed, in the United States in 2014, Airbnb started giving away carbon monoxide detectors as well as first-aid kits, smoke detectors, and safety cards that advised hosts on emergency preparedness. It also said that by the end of the year, hosts had to have smoke and carbon monoxide detectors in their homes, though there was no way to determine whether the hosts had actually installed them." — Preceding unsigned comment added by LetterOpener (talk • contribs) 17:42, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

"Business networking opportunity".

Hello! My colleague Jakob (User:JK Airbnb) is currently on paternity leave, so I'd like to submit a request for community consideration in his temporary absence. I've disclosed my conflict of interest and employer above and on my profile page. Currently, the article says, "They put together a website that offered short-term living quarters, breakfast, and a business networking opportunity for those who were unable to book a hotel in the saturated market."

Unless I'm overlooking, the citations 9, 11, or 12 don't mention "business networking opportunities" and this doesn't sound familiar to me either. Unless editors object, I propose changing "quarters, breakfast, and a business networking opportunity for" to "quarters and breakfast for" (eliminating mention of the networking opportunity). Thanks in advance. AK Airbnb (talk) 23:35, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Done. Westminster88 (talk) 10:12, 19 October 2020 (UTC)