Talk:Lonmin

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

Companies This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Companies To-do: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes Maintain : Portal:Companies Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs Other : Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner Answer requests for comments Mining Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mining, a collaborative project to organize and improve articles related to mining and mineral industries. If you would like to participate, you can edit the attached article, or visit the project page, where you can see a list of open tasks, join in the discussion, or join the project.MiningWikipedia:WikiProject MiningTemplate:WikiProject MiningMining Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. London Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. South Africa This article is within the scope of WikiProject South Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of South Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.South AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject South AfricaTemplate:WikiProject South AfricaSouth Africa ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

The 'Sanctions-busting' section is unsourced. Also, it is not a good summary of events, so I will remove it shortly. - Crosbiesmith (talk) 16:42, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The company was incorporated and then for fifty-three years, nothing happened? A little sketchy, isn't it? --Wtshymanski (talk) 21:09, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing about the strike and about the miners shot by the police? This is not very much information that you give here. Even the German Wikipedia has more. --13Peewit (talk) 01:24, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The inclusion of the Maracana shootings is a political statement. The article here is about the history of Lonmin/LonRho and very little is displayed concerning this. This article should be detailing the history and composition of this major company that has been pivotal in the mining industry of Africa for good or bad reasons. There is also very little detail given. In short this article is a waste of time and should be completed by someone who has done the research and is not just quoting sources. J. Ross 08/08/2013 --Myt792 (talk) 08:17, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I request that the section "Massacre in South Africa on 16 August 2012" be renamed. A massacre indicates that the victims were met with unneccessary & unjust force. The truth is 2 police officers and 6 miners had been killed prior to the shooting on 16 August by the very same strikers. These strikers were armed, failed to stand down & disperse when ordered to do so (even with the use of teargas & water cannons) and they charged police lines armed with weapons when the police opened fire. Thesmartstag (talk) 10:52, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. The request was not specific enough. You may consider leaving your comments on the Talk page or escalating significant issues to the conflict of interest noticeboard.

• Updating template per DES' comment, however please take note of his comment about sources. Corporate 20:16, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi all,

I noticed that this article contains a factual error, regarding Lonmin's ownership. For full disclosure, I work in Anglo American's communications team.

Lonmin isn’t a subsidiary of Anglo Platinum, as is stated in the second paragraph of this article. Anglo Platinum doesn’t own Lonmin or operate the mine.

Following Wikipedia guidelines, I don’t want to make the edit myself given my affiliation with Anglo American, but wanted to point out the factual error to the community. If someone could correct the article that would be great.

Thanks, Richard731 (talk) 09:20, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have told us who does not own Lonmin. You have not said who does own it, or if it is a fully independent entity. A link to or citation of a source would also be nice.

However, it is generally agreed that editors with a declared conflict of interest can make neutral factual corrections to articles if these are properly sourced. In a case like this, the company ownership is presumably a more or less objective fact. Feel free to make the edit yourself, adding a proper citation to a reliable supporting source. DES ^(talk) 01:54, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have closed this edit request, only because it is not specific enough. Please feel free to re-submit when you have a specific edit to request.

Also a note: the WP:COI guideline is very clear about non-controversial edits: If another editor objects for any reason, then it's a controversial edit. It seems very clear that the requester does not wish to make the edit because they consider it controversial. I agree with them. -- Eclipsed (talk) (COI) 08:17, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's been taken care of months ago! Do try to keep up... :) Roger (talk) 09:46, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The majority of the article content is exclusively about events of the last two or three years. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 11:24, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. History appears slanted towards contemporary events and padded with information from Lonrho's entry, which in some instances isn't relevant. I've left the history section untouched, but have edited to bring up to date a couple of issues re Xstrata and removed the item related to London Mining plc which was unrelated. (Prijs (talk) 20:40, 27 March 2015 (UTC))[reply]

I have removed some recent material which was not even properly sourced. The article is pretty stable now so I am removing the tag. Dormskirk (talk) 21:43, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is true, it even participated in some considerably notable episodes during the 20th century, but those are barely touched on. I am especially preoccupied with the second paragraph of the lede, which is inaccurate and undue. FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 13:35, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am the sun of fumanekile Vuyeleni I need to know about my father 102.65.151.143 (talk) 12:59, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]