Talk:Virtual assistant (occupation)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Virtual assistant (occupation) 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 was nominated for deletion on June 15, 2006. The result of the discussion was keep.

Tim Ferriss semantic error, should probably not be a page

Virtual assistant is a well understood phrase referring to a synthetic system (software robot, cloud process, etc.) that simulates a human assistant. Because Mr. Ferriss did not understand the meaning of the word "virtual" (it literally means fake) when he wrote his book, he misused it to mean "physically remote" in his writing. When the book was popular, Ferriss's misusage gained some traction among people unaware of the definition of virtual and seeing it only as a faddish buzzword - potentially creating a polysemy which would make this page reasonable. However, since that time, remote service workers have objected to being called "virtual" (as well they should!) and thus the phrase has increasingly fallen into disuse. Wikipedia should not validate Ferriss's error under these circumstances with a full page, a note on the main virtual assistant page mentioning his variant usage would be sufficient. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.153.183.229 (talk) 14:37, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that Tim Ferriss didn't understand the industry but he was not the one who coined the phrase and it was in use long before he wrote his book.

Thomas Leonard, who was a Business Coach nicknamed his personal assistant, Stacey Brice as a Virtual Assistant as she was travelling in an RV around the US at the time she was working for him back in the early 1990s. The phrase took hold and was in use by the mid 90s in both the US and Australia. Other countries followed suit. The word 'virtual' referred to the fact that the assistant was working in a remote location and not in the same office. Kathiemayt (talk) 23:59, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Kathiemayt, this comment only has value if you can provide a reference to support it. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 03:02, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Published reference or online?

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Anastacia_Brice was the very first VA. Her client, a business coach, https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Thomas_J._Leonard was the one who named her as a Virtual Assistant.

There are many Virtual Assistant Networks in the world, some were started back in the 1990s. Kathiemayt (talk) 03:22, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

One of the largest networks in the world was started in 2003.

https://www.vanetworking.com/

I believe they've taken over IVAA.org which ran for many years. Kathiemayt (talk) 03:26, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Popularity

Anyone have figures as to the popularity of the occupation? AdamBiswanger1 05:09, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, found it. AdamBiswanger1 05:25, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Service Providers

I don't understand why there is a "Service Providers" section when I cannot put a link to a site that is a service provider? There is a link there to a business site that offers virtual assistant services - why can't I add www.righthandmanva.com?

--Righthandman (talk) 16:21, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct, that is a bit counter intuitive - I've renamed the section to the proper "External Links". Regardless of this, I will answer your question. The short version is that the external links are supposed to provide the reader with additional information on the topic. You link is self promotion, and does not provider the reader with any additional information. If you would like additional information, please read WP:ADVERT#External_link_spamming, Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest#What_is_a_conflict_of_interest.3F & Wikipedia:External_links#Links_normally_to_be_avoided --ShakataGaNai 05:34, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can I add https://www.vadirectory.net/about/ as a reference? Where it's got the subtitle "History of the Virtual Assistant Industry or should we say ‘History of the VA Networks’" it has history of how the industry got started back in the 90s, borne out of the home secretarial services from the 1980s. Kathiemayt (talk) 03:31, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Kathiemayt, sure, as long as it supports the claim you wish to make and is considered reliable, feel free to use the source. Please make sure not to post any bare urls, however, and familiarize yourself with proper referencing procedures. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 04:09, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, learning as I go. Kathiemayt (talk) 04:16, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kathie, please don't. You've re-started a conversation from 15 years ago; the external links section on this article was removed long ago. Your self-published material on your site will not pass our reliable sourcing requirements - it would be best to stick to material published under editorial control. You may also want to read WP:COI. Thanks. Sam Kuru (talk) 11:04, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry Sam but I am really concerned about the lack of real information on this industry. I was involved with the industry since its formation and worked with it for 27 years. How do I get across information that is real and genuine by people who were involved in the formation of the industry? There are many who have been with the industry well over 20 years. Kathiemayt (talk) 12:12, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've just become aware of another site that has a history of the industry listed at https://www.the24hoursecretary.com/virtual-assistant-industry/ which should be included. Kathiemayt (talk) 23:23, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also, what about the waybackmachine website which can verify the length of these websites and how long they've been around? That surely would speak volumes about the validity of experience and longevity of involvement in the industry by those I have alluded to. Kathiemayt (talk) 23:26, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at wayback and then writing "site X has been around since 19XX" based on when wayback gathered it is WP:OR. DMacks (talk) 01:49, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So, in other words, unless it's published (printed) material it's not considered as fact? And what about those who publish information that is incorrect? 175.36.26.61 (talk) 04:01, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry DMacks, wasn't logged in when I replied. I'm just really concerned about people writing stuff about the VA industry who haven't actually been involved with it. There has to be some recognition of those who have been involved with it, since its birth, or at least for a long time. Kathiemayt (talk) 04:03, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Off Topic

I think that including a section on how to become a virtual assistant would be more relevant to include. There are several associations that could have external links where people can find more information. There are also networks such as http://www.121temps.com that offer free access to further information on how to set up in Australia for instance. VA4U is another external site that offers more information.

How do we include these links and who decides if they are of interest?

```` —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.179.112.241 (talk) 13:37, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Providing referenced prose on how to become a virtual assistant, but external links to sites that are not meant to simply give information will be removed as spam. Carl.bunderson (talk) 04:27, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blogspot EL

Is it really necessary to include the blog post in the EL section? Blogs are prohibited, with the exception of those written by accepted authorities (or something to that effect) in the field. Even if this one is, it sets a bad example and encourages others to come along and add blogspam, because they won't be able to see the difference between their EL and this one. So is there a particular justification for including this one? Carl.bunderson (talk) 07:06, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the "business resources" for information on the subject are on the spam blacklist. Ottre (talk) 18:07, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And that is a reason to put a blog in the EL? Carl.bunderson (talk) 18:38, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wasn't looking very hard, but... only two posts up?! Sorry for missing that. Ottre (talk) 20:26, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, needs to be removed. Which provides the better summary in your opinion: this overview, this archive, ~~this video (bear in mind the significant load time), this interview (graded source) or this report (detailed history in German http://www.die-gesundheitsreform.de, presumably notable)~~? Ottre (talk) 20:26, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would say that the pdf overview is the clear choice. It's detailed, and since it's a pdf, it has much much less advertising-feeling stuff than do the others. And I didn't really look at the video or the German source; videos take too much time, I don't think most users are going to sit through them, plus the loading; and I'd say the majority of English-speakers do not also speak German. Carl.bunderson (talk) 04:13, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: An editor just added this blog, unsure that it should be considered spamming at this stage. Ottre (talk) 03:20, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm very wary of allowing blogs in the EL, but you seem to be doing more on this page, so if you want it I won't argue. Carl.bunderson (talk) 03:48, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It seems far more reliable than the other blogs, and probably should be included, my concern is that the other link posted was for a similar website (and blog) started at the same time?! If it is some sort of co-ordinated spamming, we might want to consider locking the page. Ottre (talk) 04:18, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Probably not a bad idea; spam is such a huge problem on pages like this, where people just want to advertise their services n wares. Carl.bunderson (talk) 08:03, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation page?

Resolved

– 24.150.190.164 has updated the terminology, just added a Template:Distinguish link to disambiguate the page. Ottre 16:33, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently, the "Virtual Assistant" is a large part of engineering education. There's a new trend known as the "Virtual Concierge" in flatworlding business. I'm sure there's more too. Ottre (talk) 20:30, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Added cross reference

Virtual Assistance, which helps define the tasks that a Virtual Assistant may perform. It is also a good idea to provide links to associations and groups whose members provide this service. Mccainre (talk) 01:40, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Correct link for "A Global Economy...A Local Business" Article

The site where this link was originally has been updated and moved to a new host:

this article can now be found at: http://www.virtualworkforce.ca/articles.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.71.195.25 (talk) 16:57, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing 'not to be confused'

It says: not to be confused with 'virtual personal assistant', which points to Virtual office. That's quite confusing to me. What's the difference? Pooh (talk) 15:23, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Virtual assistant redefined

Hi,

I do not agree with the Wiki data on virtual assistants. It only refers to one concept of virtual assistants - where someone provides this service as a single entrepreneur. However, over the last couple of years a lot of very good service providers have mushroomed (specially offshore) who provide the same service but as an organisation and not just an individual. These companies are highly efficient and offer services as dedicated assistants (similar to the older concept of VAs) or even as task based where they charge something around a dollar a task. This is possible because of their cost advantage in being located in India or Phillipines. Some examples of such service providers would be (in no particular order):-

1) GetFriday (http://www.getfriday.com) 2) Rent A Smile (http://www.rentasmile.com) 3) PA Genie (http://www.pagenie.com)

I think it is very important that we adequately address this in our understanding of virtual assistants as I strongly believe that the whole landscape is changing. The other thing that might be pertinent to address here is the kind of work which virtual assistants are now handling with some examples. From doing the work related only to spreadsheets, reports or travel bookings they have now expanded to include just about anything which can save your time such as finding information on anything, making 3rd party calls (such as those to customer service locations), booking a private jet or even reading bedtime stories to your child if you are away on a business trip!

I invite comments on my observations and we can then all decide what additional information, if any, we want to add to our content.

Thanks. Nikunjmittal123 (talk) 04:24, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that circumstances have changed and not included in the definition. In Australia, for instance, virtual assistants are not considered to be independent contractors unless they satisfy a range of criteria set by the tax department. This definition is outdated in that regard and could send the wrong message. Lizparker121 (talk) 03:29, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Change of hat-note

I changed the hat-note "Not to be confused with automated online assistant" to "This article is about the employment type. For artificial agents, see automated online assistant", because the previous line implied that it would have been wrong to use "virtual assistant" in the sense of "artificial agent", but in fact it is commonly used in that sense. This does not seem to be the intended use of a not-to-be-confused-with-template. Still, suggestions of improvement are welcome. Mikael Häggström (talk) 16:52, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merger?

From what I see, the Virtual assistance article duplicates much of this topic (in fact it sepnds most of its time talking about "Virtual assistants". It makes sense to me it is merged into this article (which began a year earlier). Some of the above comments are correct, that this article is a bit restrictive in its definition. But neither article is particularly well-sourced and seems to be littered with unsourced statements and opinion. Cut out the generalities in both articles and you could make a very decent mix.

I came across these articles after declining a draft article at AfC about Virtual Health Assistants. This would be a valid topic to add to a merged article. Sionk (talk) 11:05, 25 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Merge The two articles are based upon the same subject; in fact, Virtual assistance even refers to "virtual assistants," especially in the "Job description" section. I don't see any reason why this merge should not happen. MJ94 (talk) 20:28, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Agree I don't even know how these two articles were created separately. Iady391 | Talk to me here 22:48, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Agree Virtual assistant seems to be better from SEO point - more people google Virtual Assistant. But virtual assistance seems to be proper definition, as now it is rather provided by companies than individuals.Olesava (talk) 16:31, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done DMacks (talk) 09:23, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

merge virtual assistance and virtual assistant

Hey, guys,

I am new at Wikipedia, so I may not caught everything, but I also agree to merge pages "Virtual Assistant" and "Virtual Assistance" which are actually on the same topic. I also would offer to add more information about providers of this service - like there are popular countries and services to hire virtual assistants, also I would expand obligations of VA and their rates. What do you think? I could do that, as I have been working as a VA and know the topic well.

Also I would like to write about outstaffing in English and some companies that offer VA service. In particular, I see requested articles VAfromEurope and Virtual Staff Finder. Is it fine, due to ethics of Wikipedia?Olesava (talk) 16:32, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done DMacks (talk) 09:23, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]