Jump to content

Talk:Genting Group

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Controversies section

[edit]

I don't think there is anything in this section that cannot/shouldn't be there, but there are a few problems with how it is presented and cited.

  • Non neural phrasing, such as "continues to maintain that they have no ties to Ho and have refused to address". This is POV flavoured, since it not only suggests they are being unreasonable in the face of facts, but implies an opinion about what they should be doing.
  • A lot of the content is cited to "Florida Clarion". I would seriously question that this is a reliable source, since it appears essentially to be a blog by one person (despite its claims to being a "online media outlet"). Some of the cited links themselves to the content also appear to me to be broken.
  • "Controversial photographs" - I don't think we can describe a photo of two people to be "controversial" without voicing an opinion. Material "circulated on the Internet" is not a reliable source. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 14:41, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Genting Group page has recently been protected by administrators due to content dispute. However the current protected version contains both vandalism and defamation of living persons. Although these articles are referenced, they are misleading by referencing deliberate factual errors and impropertly cited materials. Examples of this includes use of blogs and tabloid articles as sources. Additionally, the use of correct referencing of other unrelated individuals, particularly relating to the articles on organized crime and links to North Korea is intended to mislead, as the sources itself do not mention the Company or its Chairman but another wholly unrelated figure. Please properly check the sources as none of them verify or even mention a relationship between the Company or its Chairman to the unrelated controversial figure. 160.83.105.33 (talk) 04:01, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Please find a break-down below of why "Controversies" section, while seemingly adequately referenced, does not in actuality contain any verifiable sources, and why this is not a content dispute, but a case of both vandalism and defamation of living person.

While the user above Escape Orbit has correctly pointed out that a lot of the references cite a blog called "Florida Clarion" (notes 12, 14,15), which is not a reliable or verified source, this should indicate that as a result, the Wiki page does wrongly contain materials that should not be there. Sources from the two tabloid news articles (notes 8 & 11), "New York Daily News" and "Miami New Times" are tabloid articles and should not be considered as verifiable sources due to tabloid sensationalism. However, when taken into account the context of the articles, both articles never confirm a relationship between the two parties as factual and remains only speculative in nature.

Notes 10 and 12 are references to Stanley Ho a supposed mob figure, which has been stated in the paragraph above, does not have a relationship with the Company. Thus articles making reference to Stanley Ho, should be considered irrelevant to this particular Wiki page. It should also be noted that articles "Alleged Ties to Organized Crime" and "Alleged Links to North Korea" are defamatory in nature to a living person given that there is no verified source, and it is improperly cited. An example of improper citation can be seen in "Alleged Links to North Korea" which is intentionally misleading by stating Mr. Lim and Mr. Ho have interests in North Korea. However, the source of the article (Note 13) which is unverifiable, instead states that: "Ho says he is prepared to go to the most unlikely places to open casinos if he can get a license and make a profit. In 2000, he spent $30 million to open the Casino Pyongyang, which is located across the street from Kim Jong Il's Workers Party headquarters in the North Korean capital." The reference itself does not make any mention of working with Mr. Lim to operate a casino in North Korea and is thus intentionally misleading.

Lastly, "Seneca Tribe Controversy" which again references the unverifiable blog "Florida Clarion" as a source, (note 15) is again sensationalist in nature (the title of the note in the Wikipedia article itself wildly claims "Genting connected to Islamic terrorists"), however, the article itself indicates Genting Group is conducting illegal activities in violation of the Indian Gaming Regulations. If this were indeed true, the article does not back up, or show any evidence of prosecution for wrongdoing which would have taken place, other than reference to the "Florida Clarion" blog. This leads me to believe that this did not take place and is fictional. Looking back at the whole context of the "Controversies" section, user "CinagroErunam" may be intentionally misleading Wiki users by mixing non-fictional figures and events with fiction. His/her recurrence of reverting deletions of the entries above, which have been numerously identified by other users and repeatedly warned, as not containing verifiable source or improper citation, can be seen as a form of vandalism, and the nature of the articles, are also defamation of a living person, since the allegations are never referenced to a credible source. If user "CinagroErunam" did indeed act in malice to harm reputations, appropriate actions should be taken to protect the reputation of this page. It was not my intention to enter an "editing war" but the situation escalated quickly and Wikipedia guidelines advise to warn the offending user first which has previously been done. Thanks. 160.83.104.33 (talk) 11:54, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • The content of the "controversies" section was not adequately supported by sources. Several of the references were dead links to a page that does not currently exist. At least one was a link to a source of doubtful reliability, which even had the heading "gossip", tending to indicate that even its author did not regard it as reliable. Other claims went beyond what was in the cited sources. Some of them constituted unacceptable synthesis of sources to create a conclusion which was not supported by any of those sources, along the lines "there is a source that tentatively suggests a possible connection of X to Y, and another source that connects Y to Z, so X is connected to Z". Initially I did not wish to make any changes to the article, because doing so might reduce the extent to which I could act as an uninvolved administrator. However, it has become clear to me that this section of the article was a clear breach of the sourcing requirements for material concerning living people. As such, policy requires that it be summarily removed, so I have done so. I call editors' attention to the policy that the burden of proof is on those who wish to retain, restore, or undelete the disputed material. When the protection of the article ends, the disputed material must not be restored without establishing adequate sources. I strongly urge anyone who wishes to do so to discuss the matter here first, with a view to reaching consensus. Persistent addition of unsourced controversial claims about living persons may lead to being blocked from editing. I will reduce the length of the page protection, to expire three days from now. I hope that it will not become necessary to reinstate the protection after that, as doing so interferes with legitimate editing. JamesBWatson (talk) 09:25, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why is someone from Deutsche Bank 160.83.105.33 so defensive about Genting Group? Are you the lawyers behind their U.S. finances? There appears to be an abundance of sources out there which make these Genting ties to Chinese organized crime and other controversies. Is every source which disagrees with your client's claims of innocence an unreliable tabloid? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.217.85.200 (talk) 19:54, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Firstly, isn't Deutsche Bank 'a bank' and not a law firm?? And secondly, when exactly did a job description at a bank involve editing a Wikipedia page? Because I would like to sign up for that please. Clearly you were not gifted with a lot of intellect. Your accusations are as baseless as your allegations towards this company. I find it very revealing that you are clearly interested in my motives, because obviously, you yourself have great interest in this company by helping to spread rumours. It is also very revealing to see from the user talk of "CinagroErunam" (is that you??) who started the rumour-mongering on this page, that he has been a loyal contributor to an industry rival's page. Clearly there are bitter competitors trolling this page, and are so cowardly, that they must resort to hiding behind their screens to vandalise and defame, while questioning other Wikipedia users who have sincere motives instead. Clearly you are not interested in contributing to Wikipedia for the better but are out to spread hate. Why don't you tell me who you are? 160.83.104.34 (talk) 10:19, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from LikeLakers2, 10 October 2011

[edit]

Requesting null edit to purge cache and to remove this page from Category:Wikipedia pages with incorrect protection templates. LikeLakers2 (talk | Sign my guestbook!) 20:07, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Genting Group. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:25, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Genting Group. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:23, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Genting Group. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:03, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Genting_Group&oldid=1207383506"