Talk:Grupo Salinas

POV concerns
The main thing here is I found the article written like a PR piece, rather than an encyclopedia article.I doubt its neutrality, hence I put the NPOV flag. -- Samuel di  Curtisi  di  Salvadori  22:11, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree, somebody removed it but I put it back. How on earth could an article that starts with 'Grupo Salinas is a group of dynamic, fast growing, and technologically advanced companies, focused on creating shareholder value' possibily be considered neutral or even encyclopedic. Mixcoatl (talk) 17:39, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

I have already changed the introduction in order to improve the quality and try to avoid publicity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Analytic4084 (talk • contribs) 18:15, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Gruposalinas logo.jpg
Image:Gruposalinas logo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 23:39, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

The SEC Affair
This is terribly written!

A lot of the problem is probably a bad translation but nothing explains at all what the complaint of the SEC was! Bob (talk) 19:53, 11 September 2012 (UTC)


 * @Bobjuch I agree, it is terribly written. 2605:EF80:2B:CF32:0:0:1261:E789 (talk) 02:55, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

removing POV tag with no active discussion per Template:POV
I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
 * This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
 * There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
 * It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
 * In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.

Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 22:37, 20 June 2013 (UTC)