Talk:Hyder Consulting

Reads like a marketing article

Reads like a marketing article.

Also interesting that there is no mention of the west gate bridge collapse especially considering the royal commission stated that they were mostly at fault

"For all the above reasons, we are compelled to conclude that FF & P bear a heavy burden of responsibility for the failure of the bridge. While we have found it necessary to make some criticism of all the other parties, justice to them requires us to state unequivocally that the greater part of the blame must be attributed to FF & P."

I agree that it is mainly marketing material and very little is sourced. I would propose stripping it back to a stub and building it up properly. Dormskirk (talk) 08:07, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The information used to be there and at various points over the last decade or more that I have been watching parties have removed and bowdlerised to the extent that I (as a descendant of one involved in the 1840s and 1850s) just got angry and left it all to fester away as more and more "independents" formed one single bigger and bigger enterprise. I expected Hyder to disappear soon because it has been 'history' for a while. Eddaido (talk) 08:24, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. I have cut the article right back. Please feel free to build it up again using properly sourced material. Best wishes. Dormskirk (talk) 13:13, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions. Don't think I've even made any contributions to the firms that comprised Hyder, just watched in dismay. 170 years ago is a bit remote now. Eddaido (talk) 20:33, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]