Talk:Airbnb
This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.
- Add new text under old text.
- New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.
- Assume good faith
- Be polite and avoid personal attacks
- Be welcoming to newcomers
- Seek dispute resolution if needed
| Former featured article candidate | Airbnb is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the archive. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
| This level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject California , a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California 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.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. | |||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=link}
| WikiProject icon | Companies Low‐importance | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
.jpg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.ECR-edit-request-warning{ display:none; }
Parts of this article are related to the Arab–Israeli conflict , which is subject to the extended-confirmed restriction .
You are not an extended-confirmed user, so you must not edit or discuss this topic anywhere on Wikipedia except to make an edit request. (Additional details are in the message box just below this one.)
Warning: active arbitration remedies
The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. Parts of this article relate to the Arab–Israeli conflict .The following restrictions apply to everyone editing this article:
- All participants in formal discussions (RfCs, RMs, etc) within the area of conflict are urged to keep their comments concise, and are limited to 1,000 words per discussion, excepting citations and quotations.
- You must be logged-in and extended-confirmed to edit or discuss this topic on any page, except for making constructive edit requests.
- You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours (except in limited circumstances).
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator.
If it is unclear which parts of the page are covered, the content in question should be marked within the wiki text by an invisible comment. If no comment is present, please ask an administrator for assistance. If in doubt it is better to assume that the content is covered.
This article could use a pretty major rewrite, much of it falls under WP:PROSELINE and the separate article Timeline of Airbnb is not any better. - Indefensible (talk) 13:21, 11 June 2023 (UTC) Reply
- I agree. The history section is out of hand. Sawitontwitter (talk) 15:28, 7 September 2023 (UTC) Reply
Does the regulations by jurisdiction section accurately capture the news regarding NYC's ban? The copy in article seems to be correct, but it doesn't seem like it's been updated recently to reflect the recent law, so I'm a little confused and wondering if I'm missing something. https://www.wired.com/story/airbnb-ban-new-york-city/ Sawitontwitter (talk) 15:30, 7 September 2023 (UTC) Reply
The sentence currently in the lead gives undue weight to Israeli settlement compared to other controversies. Perhaps the best course of action would be to delete the sentence entirely or mention other controversies as well. Thesmallthings123 (talk) 16:35, 25 October 2023 (UTC) Reply
- The organisation has certainly had its fair share of controversies in its relatively short existence, not least being implicated in the shortage of availability of long-term lets for tenants in many cities in the western world. I'd agree with including more of them in the lede. Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 16:39, 25 October 2023 (UTC) Reply
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 January 2024 and 29 April 2024. Further details are available on the course page . Student editor(s): NorthShoreLife (article contribs ). Peer reviewers: JuiceJohnson .
— Assignment last updated by TotalSolarEclipse (talk) 17:01, 24 February 2024 (UTC) Reply
Hello,
It appears my article contribution was removed from the Airbnb Wiki page, and I am seeking specific answers as to why, so I may revise my draft accordingly. Please let me know what I may work on, or provide me with some revision advice.
Thanks,
Garrett NorthShoreLife (talk) 18:22, 20 April 2024 (UTC) Reply
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 5 September 2024 and 4 December 2024. Further details are available on the course page . Student editor(s): Pomegranate.a (article contribs ).
— Assignment last updated by Pomegranate.a (talk) 22:10, 11 September 2024 (UTC) Reply
@DMacks and Jay8g: well. There is indeed something funny going with the summary here, and peculiarly it's not even with a consistent bias. E.g, the text claims that Airbnb is responsible for 20% of tourism emissions, while the study actually states: Collectively, accommodation accounts for about 1 per cent of global emissions and 20 per cent of tourism emissions.
- that is, all types of accommodation incl. hotels etc. Plus the first two refs are duplicates of each other. That does indeed smell of LLM. So, agree on de-merits that this stuff is likely not to be trusted. (It's still neither promotional nor off-topic, but that is beside the point under the circumstances) --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 19:42, 30 October 2024 (UTC) Reply
- @Elmidae -- it's a low-effort student assignment, see the section directly above and WP:ENB#NAS 348 Global Climate Change promotional content. The original text the student added was highly promotional, but some other editors trimmed it down a bit before I decided to remove it entirely. :Jay8g [V•T•E ] 02:03, 31 October 2024 (UTC) Reply
- Yes, I did the trimming-down, and the content wasn't overtly promotional even before that. But whatevs. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 07:05, 31 October 2024 (UTC) Reply
@Grayfell: I'm not sure what content to write but here are some lead refs holding up AirBnB as an example of the sharing economy (the second one is a whole special issue devoted to it):
- Quattrone, Giovanni; Kusek, Natalia; Capra, Licia (2022). "A global-scale analysis of the sharing economy model – an AirBnB case study". EPJ Data Science. 11 (1): 36. doi:10.1140/epjds/s13688-022-00349-3. PMC 9244437 . PMID 35789663.
- Hall, C. Michael; Prayag, Girish; Safonov, Alexander; Coles, Tim; Gössling, Stefan; Naderi Koupaei, Sara (2022). "Airbnb and the sharing economy". Current Issues in Tourism. 25 (19): 3057–3067. doi:10.1080/13683500.2022.2122418.
DMacks (talk) 22:15, 11 November 2024 (UTC) Reply
- Hello. I'm sure there are many, many more sources which could be used for this, but I think we still need context. My concern is that "sharing economy" is broad and somewhat ambiguous, so I don't think we should take this for granted. A deeper and more subtle issue is that these companies use 'sharing' as a mild euphemism. My assessment is that platform economy is a more neutral term for this which avoids this ambiguity over the term 'sharing'. (That article is also better-written and more directly relevant to this topic). Navboxes cannot include any of this context, so I think it would be beneficial to explain this neutrally before including it in a navbox. Grayfell (talk) 22:30, 11 November 2024 (UTC) Reply
- TIL that platform economy is a thing. I agree it fits better and that AirBnB doesn't match at least one of the major meanings of sharing economy. DMacks (talk) 04:51, 12 November 2024 (UTC) Reply
Just to note that I agree that this item is relevant to this article (not just Joe Gebbia) and that a short mention is not undue, nor does it represent egregious duplication. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 20:59, 24 February 2025 (UTC) Reply
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 21 January 2025 and 23 April 2025. Further details are available on the course page . Student editor(s): Basketball2025-5 , Felix Trojan (article contribs ).
— Assignment last updated by Felix Trojan (talk) 00:54, 5 March 2025 (UTC) Reply
Should the "Criticism and controversies" section discuss the impact of service fees on guest costs?
Fees: Airbnb’s service fees range from 14% to 20% of the booking total for guests. While these fees are framed as necessary for "platform maintenance and customer support", Critics argue that these fees contribute to disproportionately high costs for guests and raise questions about the platform’s profit margins. When combined with cleaning fees and taxes, Airbnb bookings can cost 30–50% more than the advertised nightly rate. This pricing model not only misleads travelers but also inflates the perceived value of short-term rentals, further skewing the housing market.
Sources: Why Airbnb has a pricing problem, and what to do about it
Behind Airbnb’s Pricing Policy Shift: Ending Hidden Fee Backlash for Good
Since When Did Airbnb Become AirbnFees? - Cheapism Jjj3190 (talk) 20:41, 2 September 2025 (UTC) Reply
Should the Criticism section of the Airbnb article include sourced content discussing allegations of review suppression and its impact on transparency and consumer trust?
Suggested Content:
Censorship of Negative Reviews Airbnb has faced criticism for allegedly censoring or suppressing negative guest reviews, raising concerns about transparency and consumer trust. While the platform maintains policies to remove reviews that violate its content guidelines—such as those deemed irrelevant, retaliatory, or containing prohibited language—some critics argue that these mechanisms may be used to remove legitimate complaints. Reports have surfaced of hosts disputing unfavorable reviews and successfully having them removed, sometimes by submitting misleading evidence or citing ambiguous policy violations. Additionally, some guests have reported that Airbnb did not reinstate reviews even after providing documentation supporting their claims. These concerns have led to broader discussions about whether Airbnb’s moderation practices prioritize brand reputation and host satisfaction over transparency, potentially limiting access to honest feedback and obscuring safety-related issues for future travelers.
Sources: The Dark Side of AirBnBs - Business Review at Berkeley
Jjj3190 (talk) 20:53, 2 September 2025 (UTC) Reply
- I have removed the RFC tags from this discussion, as this is an inappropriate use of the RfC process. There has been no prior discussion, and it isn't an appropriate use of the community's time to hold an RfC every time someone's edits are reverted. If, after attempting to discuss your changes, there is either no response or no consensus then you should consider opening an RfC. Adam Black talk • contribs 22:30, 2 September 2025 (UTC) Reply
- JJJ, did you use an WP:LLM to write this talk page post? The tone and formatting seem very similar to ChatGPT-generate content. glman (talk) 14:00, 4 September 2025 (UTC) Reply
- Thanks for your question and your continued engagement. I do use Ai, but only as a tool with strict limitations, to refactor my own original content; to enhance readability, and when necessary, improve Wikipedia:Neutral point of view Jjj3190 (talk) 18:11, 7 September 2025 (UTC) Reply
- To what extent? The formatting and tone of your initial post in this thread appears to be directly copied from ChatGPT. glman (talk) 18:09, 8 September 2025 (UTC) Reply
- Already answered. It has that formatting and tone because I use it specifically for help with formatting and tone—to enhance readability and if necessary, improve Neutral Point of View. This is the textbook appropriate use of Ai. This will be my final comment on the matter. Jjj3190 (talk) 19:06, 8 September 2025 (UTC) Reply
- To what extent? The formatting and tone of your initial post in this thread appears to be directly copied from ChatGPT. glman (talk) 18:09, 8 September 2025 (UTC) Reply
- Thanks for your question and your continued engagement. I do use Ai, but only as a tool with strict limitations, to refactor my own original content; to enhance readability, and when necessary, improve Wikipedia:Neutral point of view Jjj3190 (talk) 18:11, 7 September 2025 (UTC) Reply
- Additional support for consensus has been expressed by User:Mikeycdiamond on my talk page at User talk:Jjj3190#September 2025 Jjj3190 (talk) 17:07, 8 September 2025 (UTC) Reply
- Mikeycdiamond's comments on your talk page express no support for reinserting your text, simply for discussing it here. glman (talk) 18:09, 8 September 2025 (UTC) Reply
- I will allow others to decide if his comments express support for consensus: "...the RfC looks mostly fine. The one suggestion I have is that you should put the name of a publication or author instead of constantly using the word critics.
Mikeycdiamond (talk) 12:50, 4 September 2025 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jjj3190 (talk • contribs) Reply- I would prefer if you'd not put my signature on your comments. Mikeycdiamond (talk) 19:20, 8 September 2025 (UTC) Reply
- Also, I was referring to the content of the text. I didn't have the time to look over the sources, so my comments doesn't apply to the sourcing. Mikeycdiamond (talk) 19:24, 8 September 2025 (UTC) Reply
- I would prefer if you'd not put my signature on your comments. Mikeycdiamond (talk) 19:20, 8 September 2025 (UTC) Reply
- I will allow others to decide if his comments express support for consensus: "...the RfC looks mostly fine. The one suggestion I have is that you should put the name of a publication or author instead of constantly using the word critics.
- Mikeycdiamond's comments on your talk page express no support for reinserting your text, simply for discussing it here. glman (talk) 18:09, 8 September 2025 (UTC) Reply
- The first three sources you've linked all appear unreliable. The first is an advertisement article on the site of a product, the second does not appear to be a reliable site, and only lists AirBNB's policy changes, the third appears to also be an opinion piece. The fourth is a student-written blog pieces, but it could link out to some useful sites. glman (talk) 18:13, 8 September 2025 (UTC) Reply
- Might as well also post here what I posted at ANI since it's a content issue. The gist is that the edits in question did not improve neutral point of view, but the opposite.
- Take this, which inserts opinions like
Among the most alarming safety concerns
("alarming" according to whom? What if someone finds other concerns more alarming, or isn't alarmed at all?) and adds weasel wording likeraising concerns about transparency and consumer trust
andThese practices have led to broader concerns
(whose concerns?). They also insert several unsourced paragraphs with synthesis issues, such as the claim that Airbnb's hidden fees havebecome a focal point in the broader debate over housing affordability
, which is not only editorializing but ridiculous -- in the housing-prices debate, with all its enormity, a "focal point" is... one company's laundry fees? Worse, the edit also appears to have inserted at least one error. The edit states thatTens of thousands of complaints have been filed with Airbnb over the past decade regarding hidden cameras in rental properties.
The number from the original source is 111 complaints in 5 years. - This is just one diff, and I didn't even review it all that thoroughly, just spot-checked a few paragraphs. In other words, this is below the bare minimum amount of review that AI text needs, and also seems to be below the amount of review that was done. Gnomingstuff (talk) 10:27, 10 September 2025 (UTC) Reply
- Exactly why I reverted the edit in the first place. Thank you! glman (talk) 13:51, 10 September 2025 (UTC) Reply
a fire damaged siding on Airbnb rental still remains damage after a few years ago. Kluge Rd.property Cypress Tx ~2026-54097-6 (talk) 18:17, 25 January 2026 (UTC) Reply
- As per WP:NSUSTAINED & WP:SBST, this single event does not appear to be notable. Peaceray (talk) 22:08, 25 January 2026 (UTC) Reply
@Pats322: thanks for the work you did on the article! I saw that you put this sentence in the intro as part of that work Airbnb does not have a loyalty program, in part attributed to its lack of business customers. I am wondering if the intro is the best place for that. Might it fit better in ''Corporate affairs'' or ''Guest review system''? Would be curious if you had any thoughts. I have a COI so I can't move that myself. Cheers PY Airbnb (talk) 20:19, 29 January 2026 (UTC) Reply
- C-Class level-5 vital articles
- Wikipedia level-5 vital articles in Society and social sciences
- C-Class vital articles in Society and social sciences
- WikiProject Apps
- C-Class apps articles
- Low-importance apps articles
- WikiProject Apps articles
- C-Class California articles
- Low-importance California articles
- C-Class San Francisco Bay Area articles
- Mid-importance San Francisco Bay Area articles
- San Francisco Bay Area task force articles
- WikiProject California articles
- C-Class company articles
- Low-importance company articles
- WikiProject Companies articles
- C-Class Oregon articles
- Low-importance Oregon articles
- WikiProject Oregon pages
- C-Class Brands articles
- High-importance Brands articles
- WikiProject Brands articles
- C-Class Websites articles
- Low-importance Websites articles
- C-Class Websites articles of Low-importance
- C-Class Computing articles
- Low-importance Computing articles
- All Computing articles
- All Websites articles
- Talk pages of subject pages with paid contributions