Talk:Wiwa v. Royal Dutch Shell Co.

Link between Shell and the charges
There is no clear link between the charges, Shell and the crimes committed. For it to have gone as far as it did, there must have been a clear link. Could someone add some detail that explains the links, and what the company or it's employees were involved in.

Surely there is some substance and this is not merely an extortion attempt.Andbrew.downes (talk) 19:16, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Agreed; it would be nice to have more (or really, any) detail as to the substance of the case. Qqqqqq (talk) 21:35, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Neutrality and conflict of interest
More than a bit one-sided given that the viewpoint of Shell is only mentioned in one sentence at the end of the article whereas the rest of the article is devoted to the viewpoint of the plaintiffs. And if one wonders why the article is so one-sided an answer might be found in the edit history, as anti-Shell activists edited here. Stepopen (talk) 16:59, 13 June 2009 (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) 04:01, 27 June 2013 (UTC)