Talk:Wateen/Archive 1

Archive 1

References Needed

the whole article needs references to third party sources, to company sources, to anything right now. --Rocksanddirt 18:24, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, the entire article needs references and also needs POV reworking. The last sentence: "The best part is a number of customers have been given someone else bills, revealing clients secrecy and express poor management and business practices in the whole Pakistan and world, thus bring bad repute to its mother concerns." The best part...? This is clearly biased. If this is true, it needs a reference. At the very least a local news report covering such incidences. 64.107.246.50 (talk) 19:08, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

the forum linked in the article has plenty proof from many different people —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.27.165.161 (talk) 17:51, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

we should not use direct hiting words... it also need some references.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Swikiwajid (talk • contribs) 08:50, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

some things are true the rest can't be attributed directly to any source. Need to check the latest situation. 58.27.192.9 (talk) 06:44, 21 July 2008 (UTC) TiReg

as mentioned before the forum linked in the article has plently proof and if required individual posts can be linked to proce the point —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.27.165.161 (talk) 03:56, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Forums and Forum posts dont count as proof. The reference should be a reputable source like a newspaper or a journal. Zohair Ahmad (talk) 15:02, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

news papers do not cover such topics everything that is in the article has been verified by technology professionals from both inside and outside wateen one record of such is available on the forum so the forum link is proof enough

and i wud like to add that there have been a rise in vandalism edits where people probably working for wateen delete the whole article this is not fair and is outrageous —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.27.165.161 (talk) 11:31, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

This was originally posted as an observation in the Teahouse:

The entry needs to address issues on: advertising objectivity meaningful references (not just industry awards which we all know are for PR purposes)

In addition the following observations on this entry can be made: Is it appropriate for a company logo to be shown with the awards below the logo? -- It looks too much like advertising; company logos should show the brand identity and the awards are not an integral part of it (this is an opinion so please advise if I am being too harsh here).

Some "achievements" are more akin to PR. Comments like the one cited below seem to lack a logical flow since an IPO that is oversubscribed and then collapses (contrary to market conditions) does not affect operations of a company. As an example, regardless of Facebook's share price, the fundamental business is not affected by the vagaries of the stock market. So to make comments like the one below (including a change in management -- which seems unrelated) seem to show an inadequate understanding of business:

<quote>2010 to Date Due to the global recession and unstability in the economic and political scenario in the country, the FDI in Pakistan slowed down adversely affecting the company. In order to raise capital, Wateen Telecom decided to go public with an IPO which was oversubscribed. Unfortunately, right after the IPO there came a fall in the share prices and the stock index was declining. Realizing the situation, Wateen Telecom underwent a major transformation which also included a change in its management. <end quote>

Finally, there is a boxed entry below the quote given above that says: "The total value of this project is around 2.4bn." -- We neither know the relevance of this being highlighted nor the currency involved. Truealpha (talk) 14:23, 8 June 2012 (UTC)