Talk:City Link (company)

This article was nominated for deletion on 28 July 2008. The result of the discussion was keep.

Companies Start‑class 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

Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

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

Coventry (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Coventry, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.CoventryWikipedia:WikiProject CoventryTemplate:WikiProject CoventryCoventry

Trains: Stations / in UK Start‑class Low‑importance

Trains Portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Low

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

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by WikiProject Stations.
	This article is supported by WikiProject UK Railways (assessed as Low-importance).

Removed Secton

"Criticisms

CityLink have been proven to lie to their consignees, and refuse to deliver packages."

Potenionally libelous so have removed this for now, if a person has a cite for this please put it back with the reference. Carpo1982 12:40, 11 April 2007 (UTC) To be fair they do lie, and they don't deliver.[reply]

A comment about frequent reports of poor service by Citylink has been added to the page. I have added three references totalling hundreds of reviews, which I believe fully supports the comment on their service.

Again, not wanting to quote WP:RS, quoting the sites as below is not really considered to be a reliable source. I'm going to leave these on there, but would prefer to change these to better sources if available Carpo1982 22:01, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Any particular reason why the link to reviews was removed? Given the fact that City Link has come in for a great deal of criticism from its victims - sorry, customers, erasing such a link is in itself a non-neutral point of view. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.201.12.122 (talk) 17:22, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Someone with too much time on their hands deleted my IMHO right on comments so I've taken their approach and deleted the bits lifted directly off their corporate site (which is of course in breech of copyright), besides they don't exactly deserver the publicity. IMHO, delete the whole article, its about as much use as the company itself (i.e. sod all).90.193.89.181 (talk)

Doubtful notability and original research

A quick look at this article only, but at first glance it seems consist of original research, and it has no citations that establish the notability of the subject, this article needs a rewrite, IMO Buffalo Bill talk to me 19:53, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notable? Notorious, more like

City Link is one of the major names in courier delivery in the UK: I would imagine it's known to anyone who buys though mail order or ecommerce on any kind of regular basis. It's also been in the news a lot lately as the cause of Rentokil Initial Plc's poor 2008 Q1 performance.

See e.g. http://www.forbes.com/markets/feeds/afx/2008/05/02/afx4962043.html

And yes, it richly deserves its vulgar nickname. 82.68.20.86 (talk) 15:52, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know CityLink very well, as I work in the courier trade. However, without some verifiable citations to establish the subject's notability, this article reads like an entry in a blog, rather than an encyclopedia. See Wikipedia Verifiability Policy Buffalo Bill talk to me 13:40, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Personal;y I feel this article to be opinion based and no factual relevance. citations needed urgently —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.135.139.78 (talk) 23:00, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think in its current form there's nothing wrong with it. It's short and to-the-point, and the company is definitely notable; and I know they exist because I have had to negotiate their tortuous "phantom delivery -> phone call -> take next day off work -> wait for redelivery " process myself. -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 18:55, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:City link van.PNG Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:City link van.PNG, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests February 2012

What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:City link van.PNG)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 23:45, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Removed Section

Removed "services" section since it was just advertising.Surlywombat (talk) 17:18, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Did City Link continue to use rail until its closure?

The history section of this article describes how City Link was set up to carry parcels between stations, and then expanded to carry parcels between customers and their nearest railway stations. It then covers subsequent changes of ownership and eventual closure without mentioning any changes to the way it did business.

If this is to be believed, then City Link must have still been using rail for the long haul right up to its closure. I suspect this isn't correct and that at some point it switched to using road. Can anybody confirm this, and add some history as to how and when it happened?. - chris_j_wood (talk) 15:21, 1 January 2015 (UTC) s[reply]

History and reasons for collapse

It would be useful to find research which indicates why Citylink collapsed. The parcel business has consistently grown in UK as the Internet has gained ubiquity.

I had an account with Citylink from 1991 to 1999. I found them reliable and the drivers helpful. I closed my account with them worth thousands of pounds a year in disgust how they handled (or failed to) handle the only one ever claim for a package I sent out, which they admitted had been destroyed in a warehouse fire. The item was a last-of-type TraxData 422 CDRW drive, which sold for £109. They would not pay out unless I could prove the cost price for the item, which was originally purchased as part of a bankrupt stock lot. My loss was £109 plus my administration costs since I had to refund customer. They refused to even refund the delivery charge. I spent 10 hours dealing with this (letters, phone calls) until I gave up on them completely. They caused enough trouble over this for me to recall it clearly 20 years later. An instance where insurance claim adjustment has a seriously adverse effect. Whilst this doesn't itself count as encyclopaedic, it may be a starting point for research why they collapsed. This may help others make better business decisions. Nick Hill (talk) 16:56, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]