Talk:Hutchison Whampoa

Bias?
Just like to point out that two thirds of this article consists of Whampoa's "strong links to the Communist party" and plots by the company to control the Pentagon and Panama Canal. One sentence (and a short one at that), is devoted to the opposing point of view. I'd also like to point out that many of the "sources" listed are arch-conservative think tanks and organizations. There aren't any quotes from people who are actually innvolved with the company.Also like to point out that the source of the "declassified intelligence report" is judicialwatch.org, one of the "conservative critics of China." Now I'm only an innocent reader, but it occurs to me that it would be a whole lot more factual if this "declassified intelligence report" were taken from an actual goverment institution's website. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.247.174.215 (talk • contribs)
 * I've removed the section on the intelligence report, as the credibility of the source is in question. Would be rather different if they provided a copy or a link to a copy of the document itself.  The section says the material is in a report, however, the single link is only enough to back up a claim of "Group X claims that Report Y contains ...", which gets a little tenuous. 81.104.165.184 16:31, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

What does this paragraph has to do with the article itself? "The final negotiaton and signature of the Panama Canal Treaties was done by President Jimmy Carter in September 1977, and provided that as from 12 p.m. on 1 January 2000, Panama would assume full control of canal operations and become primarily responsible for its defense.[6] Today, the Autoridad del Canal de Panamá (Panama Canal Authority) is responsible for the operation and management of the canal. Hutchison Whampoa operates ports in Panama, as it does in Mexico and other parts of the Americas." The article is about the port company... not about the Panama Canal, and whether they operate ports in the country (as they do in many other countries) or not has nothing or very little to do with the Panama Canal Treaties of 1977, the section appears biased to present Hutchison as some dark communist handler of the Panama Canal or some sort, when in reality, HPH is just a company with a contract to operate two ports (and a cruise terminal) in the country. This paragraph should be eliminated or re written. More over, the mentioned article [6] does not state in any way that Panama is "primarily responsible" for the defense of the Panama Canal, so the citation does not support the statement of the paragraph and is therefore against wikipedias policy on citations (in fact, defense of the Panama Canal is guaranteed by the De Concini Amendment of 1978, although that is not within the scope of this article or paragraph).Pixelpty (talk) 07:04, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Founder?
The link to founder John Hutchison is not correct. That person is someone else. Anyone have information on the actual founder? JXM 07:07, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Unlinking
I have reverted this edit twice now. WP:MOSLINK says "The use of links to other Wikipedia articles, for example, Ant, is encouraged. Use the links for all words and terms that are relevant to the article." Can you please explain why you keep removing internal links? There is a three-revert-rule which attempts to solve these edit disputes be encouraging discussion. &mdash;Dgiest c 03:17, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Previously involved editors
I am having a content dispute with over whether to include internal links in the article. The reason I've made a RFC is I've had no luck communicating with this person and would like the opinion of an outsider per Dispute Resolution procedures. The diffs we're revert warring over are this versus this. I'd be amenable to a compromise version but like I said, has been uncommunicative.  &mdash;dgies tc 16:00, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment by Dgies

Previously uninvolved editors
My thoughts are thus: There is currently no "References" section in the article, which I will add now. External links generally should not be included in the article itself, but rather in citations. Links to the company itself as citations should be as limited as possible, and citations instead provided from reputable secondary sources. However, 1-2 links to the company's main Web site may be included in the External links section. Smee 22:11, 25 March 2007 (UTC).
 * Comment by Smee

The use of hyperbole like "Li Ka-shing is now one of the most powerful entrepreneur and philanthropists in the world." especially without a source is strongly discouraged. Even if you did have a source it should read more like "In 2006, Hong Kong Elite Magazine announced Li Ka-shing to be the most powerful entrepreneur in Asia with a worth estimated at 500 million trilion gazillion yuan" - quote your source, don'tmake your source a fact.
 * Comment by ZayZayEM

Please be wary of using only positive biased sources of information in craeting articles. On commercial companies, this can be hard as most information comes from the company itself. This sort of information should not be given undue weight and consideration towards POV should be made. This article currently reads like an advertisement.

I support the creation of wikilinks (even red ones) to topics that are A) Relevent to the article's content by providing context for statements and B) Are encyclopedic of nature. Your creation of wikilinks to miscelleneous companies seems valid, even if they are mostly redlinks.--ZayZayEM 02:25, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Running of the Panama Canal
Does Hutchison Whampoa in reality run the Panama Canal? According to the article they have some activity there, but I'm wondering whether this truly reflects the extent of their influnce? __meco (talk) 14:35, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Érdeklődés
Tisztelt Hölgyem/Uram!

Érdeklődöm,hogy Magyar állampolgárként dolgozhatnék-e az önök cégénél? 10 éve dolgozom egy Japán cégnél Magyarországon egy Kaizen csoportban. Válaszukat megköszönve:Kovács Attila

kovacs.attila@indamail.hu — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.226.249.202 (talk) 07:36, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Criticism
I have removed a sentence opposing the viewpoint og the Burma Campaign UK. The reference for the opposing viewpoint was to a porn site. Enough said. Madchine (talk) 21:06, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Confusing tenses in lede
The article lede starts: "Hutchison Whampoa Limited (HWL) is an investment holding company based in Hong Kong. It was a Fortune Global 500 company and one of the largest companies listed on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange." Note is an investment holding company and was a Fortune Global 500 company; the rest of the lede continues to refer to the company in the past tense. The second paragraph may be a clue (it describes a merger) but by this time the damage has been done and the reader is unsure whether the company still exists or not in any form. Could this be re-cast by someone who understands what's going on, please? Tonywalton Talk 22:56, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Hutchison Whampoa. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081016000833/http://www.burmacampaign.org.uk:80/dirty_list/dirty_list_details.html to http://www.burmacampaign.org.uk/dirty_list/dirty_list_details.html#h

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

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 22:37, 17 October 2015 (UTC)