Misplaced Pages

Talk:Comcast: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 03:01, 18 October 2015 editCyberbot II (talk | contribs)Bots, Pending changes reviewers469,525 edits Notification of altered sources needing review (Peachy 2.0 (alpha 8))← Previous edit Revision as of 01:27, 19 October 2015 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,303,087 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Comcast/Archive 2) (botNext edit →
Line 27: Line 27:


<small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 03:22, 6 June 2014‎</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 03:22, 6 June 2014‎</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->

== Merger Proposal ==
I propose Merging ] with ] to create an article that represents a NPOV without forking POVs ( one priase one critical ) ] (]) 03:25, 14 March 2015 (UTC) Carmony]] (]) 21:10, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

: I would suggest that things be left in their current state. There's soooooo much ground to cover when it comes to this company and its various controversies. If we merged that article into this one, 9/10ths of it will be comprised of critiques. Comcast has a quite long history when it comes to PR disasters. ] (]) 09:25, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
::Hey Consta, I appreciate your feedback, I agree that a simple cut and paste over would leave things worse than they are. however, I think what we can do is restructure the layout of the comcast information. We could make an article "Comcast Controversies" that could be the main article for controversies. Controversies are a topic, "Criticism" is just a point of view. If comcast has a lot of lawsuits involving them we can create an article "Comcast Litigation" Because a lawsuit isn't really a critique, but it is something noteworthy especially if the lawsuit creates precedents. Currently we have 2 articles for 1 topic ( comcast general ) but we just have 2 povs ( critical and non critical ) when ideally what we would want is multiple topics to create multiple articles ( History of Comcast, Comcast Controversies, Comcast Litigation, etc) I know it is a lot of work. but the end result will be NPOV articles addressing topics. ] (]) 00:39, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
*'''Comment'''. No. In my honest opinion, there is too much criticism about this company that there needs to be an article about it. But since the article is mainly about Comcast itself, I wouldn't mind merging it. ] (]) 03:18, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
::I think the best way to handle criticism is to put it in the topic it is about. If comcast is criticized for anti-trust practices. make an section "Anti-trust" and put all information about it there. when we say "Criticism of comcast" what do we mean? would we include the criticism that it is one of the top 40 most diverse workplaces in 2015 according to Black Enterprise? or is that not allowed since it could be seen as positive criticism and we limit it to only negative? if we are limiting it only to "negative" how do we decide what negative is? we decide by leaving NPOV and having a POV. That's why topics are safe and "criticism" is a slope that always leads us away from NPOV. Comcast has done things that are not flattering absolutely, so we create sections and articles about those topics and we post the information about it. We aren't here to say "here's the good looking comcast article" and "here's the bad looking comcast article" we are here to make 1 article to cover comcast, and any sub-articles needed for topics that are big enough. ] (]) 03:25, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
::: Honestly, I think what you're offering here is a solution in search of problem. Your comment about the diverse workplace thing is especially confusing and odd. Such information is one of the company's few positive traits and can by no means be defined as any sort of critique, unless one is arguing that having a diverse workforce is a bad thing. I would support renaming the page "Comcast Controversies" but I don't think it's really necessary. That aside, I think there's way too much information about Comcast's various controversies/PR disasters/etc. to merge it all into the company's main page. It's all so nefarious that it deserves its own page (if only because adding it here would increase the article's length by at least double). ] (]) 09:47, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
:::: Controversies are not necessarily criticisms though is the point. Controversies typically draw criticism but they aren't criticism in and of themselves. the criticism is about the controversy, so lets say for example we had an article "Comcast Controversies" think how easily we could write it NPOV. Comcast did this, critics said this. It would roll out of our keyboards beautifully. instead with this "Criticism" article what do we write? could we have a "criticism of criticism" as the counter argument? it would look silly. "Comcast Litigation" would be another useful article since Lawsuits are not criticism, they are lawsuits, the actions that provoke lawsuits can draw criticism. so in a article about litigation it would be so easy to source the criticisms. but currently we have such a bad article. for example look at this part:

*Crimes by contractors
There have been instances of attack, theft, rape and other crimes by Comcast contractors. These have taken place during home installations, service calls, door-to-door flyering, and neighborhood visits.

Certainly this is controversial. but how is this a "criticism" is there someone who is saying "because the contractors did this, I criticise comcast" no, we don't have it written like that, the way we write it is as if to say "certainly YOU the READER should criticise comcast look at how bad this is" that's not NPOV. A "Comcast Controversies" would so easily handle this. Crimes of Contractors - then we provide the source. and let the reader make up their mind what to think. If a SPECIFIC criticism is about these crimes, by all means we can source it. you have to admit that the section "Crimes by contractors" is lacking a specific person ( our group ) giving the criticism. ] (]) 10:34, 16 March 2015 (UTC)


== Spinning off company with Chief Financial Officer Michael J. Angelaki == == Spinning off company with Chief Financial Officer Michael J. Angelaki ==

Revision as of 01:27, 19 October 2015

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Comcast article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 2 months 
This page is not a forum for general discussion about Comcast. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Comcast at the Reference desk.
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconCompanies High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Companies To-do:

 Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconPennsylvania High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Pennsylvania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pennsylvania on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PennsylvaniaWikipedia:WikiProject PennsylvaniaTemplate:WikiProject PennsylvaniaPennsylvania
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconPhiladelphia High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Philadelphia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Philadelphia on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhiladelphiaWikipedia:WikiProject PhiladelphiaTemplate:WikiProject PhiladelphiaPhiladelphia
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconTelecommunications High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Telecommunications, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Telecommunications on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TelecommunicationsWikipedia:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTemplate:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTelecommunications
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Comcast article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 2 months 

style issues

The very first sentence in this article sounds like an advertisement. It really should be written simply as "Comcast Corporation, formerly registered as Comcast Holdings, is a US based mass media and communications company. It is currently ranked as having the highest revenue in the world as a International Media Corporation.

Comcast and AT&T Merger

I feel that the discussion of the merger referenced in item 72, not only leads the audience to presume that comcast has current holdings in AT&T U Verse, but also the source has no affiliation with the security and exchange commission. The current Direct TV merger illustrates that competition between the two independent companies exist, and reference the previous use of broadband vs the new DSL method.

  1. "Denver Business Journal". http://www.bizjournals.com/. American City Business Journals. Retrieved 6 June 2014. {{cite web}}: External link in |website= (help)
  2. "Office of General Counsel". http://transition.fcc.gov. Federal Communications Commision. Retrieved 6 June 2014. {{cite web}}: External link in |website= (help)
  3. "Federal Communications Commission". www.fcc.gov. Federal Communications Commision. Retrieved 6 June 2014.
  4. "Forbes Online". http://www.forbes.com. Pars International. Retrieved 6 June 2014. {{cite web}}: External link in |website= (help)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.141.52.212 (talk • contribs) 03:22, 6 June 2014‎

Spinning off company with Chief Financial Officer Michael J. Angelaki

Bloomberg.com is reporting, March 2015, that Comcast is investing in a new company with CFO Angelaki that "will focus on investments in growth businesses around the world." Where is the best place to include this information in the article? Its own section under "Divisions and Subsidiaries" or under the subsection of "Venture Captial"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pistongrinder (talk • contribs) 16:10, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Comcast. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —Talk to my owner:Online 03:01, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

  1. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-03-31/comcast-to-invest-4-billion-in-new-company-with-cfo-angelakis
Categories: