Talk:Investor–state dispute settlement/Archives/2014

Mention TTIP !
I looked into this article, searched for "transatlan" and "TTIP" in vein, therefore considered that article as whatsoever low quality and gone again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.200.171.174 (talk) 11:42, 29 March 2014 (UTC) It urgently needs a profund list of all free trade agreements containing isds. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.200.171.174 (talk) 11:52, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

Debate Section Full of Unreferenced Proponents Claims
Wonder how anyone got away with stuffing so many unreferenced proponents claims in the debate section.This article could be a good case study for the WikiProject Integrity/Editor Registry NimbusWeb (talk) 10:46, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Debate section exhibits bias
I suggest that the case for and against ISDS has been presented from a point of view biased in favour. Opponents' case is presented first in summary form, followed by a lengthy refutation, in each of the two main paragraphs. Anyone reading this impartially would conclude that the intention is to present a watertight demolition of the opponents' case, which is in fact far stronger than this account makes it appear. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DavidJMidgley (talk • contribs) 13:27, 3 July 2014 (UTC)