Draft talk:Vivid Money

This draft does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Companies Companies portal This draft 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. 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 Finance & Investment This draft is within the scope of WikiProject Finance & Investment, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Finance and Investment 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.

The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE. ThisUserIsVivid (talk · contribs) has been paid by Vivid Money.

Request for independent review

I have a declared conflict of interest (employee of Vivid Money). Since the last AfC review I have:

• removed promotional language;
• restructured the page a little bit (history subsections and new compact products/services section);
• replaced or removed weaker references;
• added a proper infobox.

Could an uninvolved editor please review the draft and advise on any remaining issues I should address if needed?

Thank you. ThisUserIsVivid (talk) 15:59, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Follow‑up for PunjabiEditor69

@PunjabiEditor69: — thank you for taking the time to review Draft:Vivid Money.

The aim isn’t to promote Vivid Money, but to provide a neutral, well‑sourced article for readers. I’ve already removed additional promotional language and tightened the tone in response to your earlier feedback.

Could you please point me to:

1. Specific sentences or sections that still read like advertising so I can rewrite or remove them,
2. Particular references that you feel don’t meet the in‑depth, reliable, independent standard.

Any concrete examples will help me to understand the direction of how to improve the draft and avoid repeated resubmissions.

Thanks again for your guidance, and for volunteering your time at AfC.

— ThisUserIsVivid (talk) 19:04, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Notability (WP:NCORP) – WP:THREE

Per the AfC decline, here are three independent, reliable, non-routine sources that provide significant coverage (WP:CORPDEPTH) of Vivid Money’s strategy and business performance:

1. "Vivid vervierfacht den Umsatz – trotzdem hat die Bilanz einen Haken". FinanceFWD (in German). 2024-01-10. Analytical piece on the 2022 annual report (revenues, losses, trajectory), offering independent evaluation beyond routine announcements.
2. "Neuer Kurs bei Vivid Money: Von der Neobank zur Business-Plattform". t3n (in German). 2025-03-13. Feature with analysis of the strategic pivot to SME banking, licensing context (Joompay), and positioning in the market.
3. "Vivid Money: Neobank-Rennen beendet – strategische Neuausrichtung zur Business-Bank". IT-Finanzmagazin (in German). 2025-03-14. In-depth coverage of the refocus, competitive landscape (Qonto, etc.), and growth targets; evaluative commentary beyond a routine product/funding note.

These collectively demonstrate significant, independent coverage (strategy, competition, financial analysis), meeting WP:ORGCRIT/WP:CORPDEPTH. Please see the main draft for inline citations to these sources.

ThisUserIsVivid (talk) 18:59, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Official website

I also wanted to include the official website to the Infobox and External links sections, but the url is blocked by wikipedia spam filter. I was told that it's possible to whitelist it only after the article is published. ThisUserIsVivid (talk) 10:32, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You can request it at any time. See WP:BLACKLIST and use this link to make such request. It cannot be done here on the talk page of the draft. --CNMall41 (talk) 17:05, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@CNMall41 thanks, I mentioned it here on the talk page just in case (if reviewers would wonder why the official website is not included in the draft right now). I already tried to request whitelisting it, but it didn't work https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist&oldid=1301035044#Whitelist_request_%E2%80%93_vivid.money_(official_site). In addition there were a couple primary references (Help Center of the company) which I wanted to include, but it didn't let me because of the blacklist. Thanks again for your help. ThisUserIsVivid (talk) 17:49, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]