Talk:Sodexo/Archives/2013

Untitled

I cleaned up what I could. I also added a cite to the history portion and deleted the corporate governance section. Can we take it off cleanup? vandymorgan 09:15, 14 December 2006 (UTC)vandymorgan

This article is pretty horrible. It needs a lot of formatting and research put into it. The board of directors seems irrelevant and there is no point to cut and pasting the history section from the company's own website. Trenchcoatjedi 22:40, 5 November 2006 (UTC)Trenchcoatjedi

Racism Accusations

There is no mention of a 2005 settlement on a class-action lawsuit alleging racism against Sodexo; I realize the case resulted in a settlement, and I do not assert the guilt of Sodexho in this case, but I feel an $80million settlement is something that is important enough to mention somewhere in the article. I'll add this section in a few weeks pending discussion here. Dr.queso (talk) 03:15, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Sodexho pass/vouchers

Can someone create a new section about sodexho passes/vouchers to the article. Companies in India have started giving such passes to its employees (http://www.sodexhoindia.com/) which can be used to buy range of items (food, entertainment, clothes etc). Vjdchauhan 09:03, 29 December 2006 (UTC).

History Sources

Prior to my edit today, all the information in the history section came from Sodexho's website and had a single source referenced at the bottom of the History section. I added information and, for chronological reasons, chose to put it in the middle of the history section. My edit doesn't use the same source as everything else. I just wanted to bring that up so that no one will think that the history section doesn't reference its sources. Chris01720 01:18, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

this doesn't exactly seem balanced

This seems to be written in a manner very anti-Sodexho. The activities section has really very little to do with what Sodexho actually does and instead seems to focus on protests and controversy surrounding Sodexho, and much of the writing is inherently inflammatory, such as

"However, if a student has lost his school id, then he or she is not allowed to eat, even though he or she has a pre-paid meal plan and they throw all the food away anyway."

Also, the workers strike section seems to be copied and pasted from an article somewhere.

I'm new to my wikipedia acct, so I don't really know how to nominate an article for balance checks/cleanup, but this seems to be a pretty solid candidate.

Schananigans 09:54, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

I know this comment was last year, but I went to a Sodexo college for my undergrad work and am at another now for my grad work. Not having your card never caused any of us to be turned away. We gave our student ID numbers and sometimes our date of birth too, and that was it. They would let us in. The article was still pretty anti-Sodexo, I made some changes, I hope they help. CallidoraBlack (talk) 16:41, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

I agree that this article still seems biased against Sodexo, especially considering a third of the cited sources are all from the same explicitly anti-sodexo website, www.boycottsodexho.org. 129.174.161.143 (talk) 16:25, 28 May 2010 (UTC)charles

The chunk mentioning Sodexo's credit rating seems pretty irrelevant, subjective, and frankly I outright disagree that they would "benefit" from a BBB credit rating. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.169.189.229 (talk) 17:42, 31 July 2013 (UTC)