User talk:Gr1st/Archive 14

Orphaned non-free image File:A2A.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:A2A.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Gr1st (talk) 18:03, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:CNBC Europe - Europe This Week logo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:CNBC Europe - Europe This Week logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:41, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. —DoRD (talk) 14:57, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

external link for the axa canada website

hello, you have removed the external link for the axa canada website by giving me the link where wikipedia says in their guidelines that wikipedia is not a directory to put all official websites in the world. I understand and respect this but i wounder why axa canada is removed when the australian website is there ? Axa Canada is completely different from its cousin "axa.com" in France. It is a usefull link for users from Canada who wants go to directly to the official site in canada. remi —Preceding unsigned comment added by Remiturcotte (talk • contribs) 20:39, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

AXA Asia Pacific Holdings is a separate publicly traded company, controlled by AXA, and as such is something of a special case. "axa.com" is not the "French" website, it is the global corporate website through which all sites of the group are linked (see the "AXA on the web" section on the right-hand side of the homepage). You say axa.ca is useful for Canadian visitors, but what about axa.co.uk for British visitors, axa.fr for French visitors, www.axa-equitable.com for Americans, etc., etc., etc.? Gr1st (talk) 06:25, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Bunzl plc

Hi, I was just in the process of editing the lead for Bunzl plc when you reverted many of my edits without any discussion. I am happy to discuss the wording of the lead for this article but I do not believe that, as it stands, the introduction is high quality.Rangoon11 (talk) 19:27, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

And you believe that removing material from the lead, including any mention of its rather different historical focus, makes the introduction of higher quality? The lead section is supposed to "define the topic and summarize the body of the article with appropriate weight". The previous version did that better. Obviously since I wrote the previous lead section, I am going to take issue with your opinion that it was not of good quality - I can't see any problems with readability, grammar, sentence construction, etc. In fact, apart from removing a bunch of stuff, the changes you made were very minor. Gr1st (talk) 19:36, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

On another issue - if you are just going to put "Edit" or "Edits" as your edit summary, then you might as well not bother leaving one at all. It utterly defeats the point of an edit summary. Gr1st (talk) 19:41, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Two content-related points - "Global" implies to me that a company at least has some operations in every continent in the world, which Bunzl doesn't. Furthermore the company was founded in 1940, being as it was a separate entity to the family's previous operations in Europe. Gr1st (talk) 19:45, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Regarding the 'global' issue, I can see arguments both ways. Bunzl currently has operations in 23 countries across Australasia, Europe, North America and South America and tenders for 'global' contracts. It is described in the media as 'global' e.g. here: http://www.birminghampost.net/birmingham-business/birmingham-business-news/financial-business-news/2010/02/11/clearwater-corporate-finance-advises-on-bunzl-acquisition-of-clean-care-65233-25816972/.

However, I accept that it does not currently have operations on the ground in Asia or Africa. Does a company need to have operations in every continent to be global, or merely to have a spread of activities across much of the world? Where is the threshold? Presumably a company does not need to have activities in Antarctica to be global? I personally feel that it is acceptable to describe Bunzl as global, but multinational is also fine for me.

Regarding the reference to foundation in 1940, I cannot see why this should be in such a prominent position in the opening. The company's history goes back well before 1940, although 1940 is when Bunzl plc was incorporated, which is very clear from this: http://www.bunzl.com/bunzl/about/our_history/. So why emphasise 1940 in the second line of the opening of the article?

Regarding the company's historical activities, these have changed a number of times. Why emphasise the company's activities at one particular point i.e. 1940? And why is that to be emphasised over the company's present activities? I would suggest a sentence, after discussion of the company's present activities, which says something like 'The activities of the company have changed a number of times during its history, during which they have included haberdashery and the manufacture of fibres, cigarette filters and plastics'.

Regarding describing edits in the summary I will accept that this is a fault of mine, I do try to do so but accept that I should be better at this.

Happy to discuss all of the above further, if you wish.Rangoon11 (talk) 20:06, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

First off, my comments from yesterday read a little curt on second viewing, so apologies for that. I've worked some of your comments into the text and expanded the lead to be something closer to what the good/featured article guidelines look for. I'll stick it here for now so you can comment before I make the edit (refs and templates left out deliberately):

Bunzl plc is a multinational distribution and outsourcing business based in London, England. The company is primarily a distributor of a diverse range of non-food consumable products including food packaging, cleaning and hygiene supplies, personal protective equipment and carrier bags. Its customers include contract cleaners, retailers, catering firms and food processors. Bunzl has operations in 23 countries: almost half of its business is conducted in North America, with major operations in the British Isles and Continental Europe as well as a lesser presence in Australasia and Brazil.

The activities of the company have changed a number of times during its existence, frequently incorporating the disparate business interests of the founding Bunzl family, which trace their history back to a haberdashery opened in Bratislava in 1854. The current company was established in London in 1940 as a manufacturer of cigarette filters, crêpe and tissue paper, and the production of fibres, pulp, paper, building materials and plastics were all brought into the firm - and subsequently sold - over the following decades. Bunzl restructured itself as a company purely focused on distribution through a divestment process which began in the early 1990s and ended with the 2005 spin out of Filtrona.

Bunzl has been listed on the London Stock Exchange since 1957 and became a constituent of the FTSE 100 Index for the third time on 30 April 2008.

Gr1st (talk) 18:16, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Firstly I really appreciate you taking the time to discuss this and not just draft revised wording for the lead but post it here for discussion. Regarding appearing curt, thanks for your apologies although I do think that it is a problem with Wikipedia that it is very easy to appear curt when this is in no way intended. Wikipedia is generally great but in my relatively short time editing on here I have noticed how easy it is to appear curt when this is not intended. I know that I have a lot to learn in this respect myself, in terms of both appearing curt and in being too easily offended.

I should also apologise if I caused any offence by criticising the Bunzl article (which I didn't realise you had written!), which I do actually think is very good overall and certainly one of the best articles on an FTSE 100 comapny that I have seen.

I really like your new wording for the lead and would suggest just the following minor changes (my bold is just to show my changes):

Bunzl plc is a multinational distribution and outsourcing company headquartered in London, United Kingdom. The company is primarily a distributor of a diverse range of non-food consumable products including food packaging, cleaning and hygiene supplies, personal protective equipment and carrier bags. Its customers include contract cleaners, retailers, catering firms and food processors. Bunzl has operations in 23 countries: almost half of its business is conducted in North America, with major operations in the British Isles and Continental Europe as well as a smaller presence in Australasia and Brazil.

The activities of the company have changed a number of times during its existence, frequently incorporating the disparate business interests of the founding Bunzl family, which trace their history back to a haberdashery opened in Bratislava in 1854. The current company was established in London in 1940 as a manufacturer of cigarette filters, crêpe and tissue paper, and the production of fibres, pulp, paper, building materials and plastics were all brought into the firm - and subsequently sold - over the following decades. Bunzl restructured itself as a company purely focused on distribution through a divestment process which began in the early 1990s and ended with the 2005 spin out of Filtrona.

Bunzl has been listed on the London Stock Exchange since 1957 and became a constituent of the FTSE 100 Index for the third time on 30 April 2008.Rangoon11 (talk) 18:57, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Done. Cheers, Gr1st (talk) 08:08, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Atlas Copco article

I've had a quick look at most of those sources before PRODing, and was not convinced that they cover the "significant coverage", but I will look at them again in more detail.

A couple of them verify little snippets of information (the interview itself, for example, would have to be taken as not independent, as the information comes from someone in the company), from what I saw - but I do not have the time right now (I was literally checking my watchlist quickly before going offline) to look indepth at those.

I will do so tomorrow (subject to commitments!) and get back to you - either to say "you're right!" or to notify you of an AfD!

Regards, -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 15:08, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

OK - I've added some more references. In my opinion what is there now counts as "significant coverage in reliable secondary sources". I would even contend that the interview counts - yes, the info comes from someone in the company, but it has been conducted and published by a reputable newspaper and it is they who "grant" the coverage. Anyway, I'll let you review it and see what you think. Regards, Gr1st (talk) 15:47, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

I'll admit that I'm still not totally convinced that the company meets the criteria for inclusion, but I'll concede that the sources you have added may just scrape it in. However, I'll probably look in a lot more detail at a later time when I have the opportunity to and see what I think then! Thanks for your work any way -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 09:01, 30 September 2010 (UTC)