Talk:Laqtel

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Trinidad and Tobago Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trinidad and Tobago, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to the country of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines.Trinidad and TobagoWikipedia:WikiProject Trinidad and TobagoTemplate:WikiProject Trinidad and TobagoTrinidad and Tobago articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please stop undo'ing my reverts User:CaribDigita and if you want to contribute to the article, abide by Wikipedia standards. This page should not be a place for Corporate propaganda, anything put here should be cited. Corporate jargon belongs on its website not the encyclopedia. Rasadam (talk) 03:10, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Umm...if you have a problem with the tone, re-write the sections in question in a more neutral manner. But you should not approach this in such a confrontational manner. Guettarda (talk) 05:51, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Have you actually read the article? It is essential copy and pasted from Corporate press releases. There's nothing to "re-write", it just simply does not belong on Wikipedia. For the record, I added the 'ONLY' reference to the entire article when I added an update on recent developments. I would re-examine your definition of confrontational when you're simply reverting edits and not actually contributing the the quality of the article. Rasadam (talk) 12:07, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I also find it ironic, looking at the edits you did on Trinidad and Tobago Unit Trust Corporation, you did exactly what I did there... but are reverting it here? Rasadam (talk) 12:34, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1. Press release? Link, please?

View the references. About 14/17 of them were simply press releases published in the media. Rasadam (talk) 08:58, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1. "I added the 'ONLY' reference to the entire article" Really? Your edit removed 17 refs. Not sure how you can have added the "ONLY" reference when there are 17 others. Can you explain that? Guettarda (talk) 05:11, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No lines in the article were cited, only a dump of references were placed. Granted self published sources aren't invalid references, however the problem is with the jargon. Please, just take a look at the actual content removed. It was heavy in jargon referring to business transaction (many potential) and very number heavy with intricate internal details as to their mergers and partnerships. It's the sort of things Wikipedia does not promote on corporate pages. If you're intent on reverting each edit, I'll just give this up because it isn't worth the time considering Laqtel is literally going bust at this point. Rasadam (talk) 08:58, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]