Talk:Solway Group
Add topicLatest comment: 2 years ago by NewOrlean in topic Untitled
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Untitled
[edit]This article is pure propanganda, please see who last updated it : Redaut, and the only other article made by this contributor: "Alexander Bronstein"
This is cearly an attempt from the company solway or some employees to wash the company public image. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.247.165.10 (talk) 21:42, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- Hi. Your claims are mostly untrue. There is no need to launder the company's image. A large-scale investigation was conducted, and the company was sanctioned due to the unproven facts cited earlier. If you pay attention - most of the previously made negative and misinforming edits were based on speculation and assumptions. The investigation also proved that some of the Wikipedia editors who made these edits acted as commissioned editors - paid editors paid by detractors. And plus, please note. In correcting this article with new facts and data. I did not delete the information added by these bribed editors. I only added the already known and published information. About which these editors (many of them, by the way, are "one-dayers" and even have already been removed from Wikipedia) "modestly" kept silent. Which clearly led to the "one-sidedness" of information presentation. Redaut (talk) 11:34, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
- So given the above facts and the persistence of previous "criticism" of the company, by underhanded authors. I did not delete their edits. I kept them. Exclusively supplemented with new facts. What if this does not show the neutrality of the material? Both positive points, criticism and different points of view have been preserved. Redaut (talk) 11:45, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
- I disagree with you. Completely misses the point of the claim. The article is neutral. It leaves out both criticism and facts. When you put templates about non-neutrality (POV) - be kind - write justification, not your personal assumptions and speculations. Otherwise, if I were the author, I would take it as a call to remove all criticism and bring the article to just neutral status with just simple numbers and facts. NewOrlean (talk) 12:26, 11 October 2023 (UTC)