Category talk:Brookfield Properties buildings
Latest comment: 5 years ago by Dvruthven in topic Edit request following category renaming
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Brookfield Properties buildings category. |
|
This category does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Edit request following category renaming
editThis edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. Per WP:NOTBROKEN. |
I work for Brookfield Asset Management in the Branding & Communications group, on behalf of Brookfield Properties. This category was recently renamed and the description should be updated as well, to reflect the company's name, "Brookfield Properties," and the fact that the company manages properties but does not own them.
Please change the description to: This category displays the buildings managed by global commercial real estate firm Brookfield Properties, a subsidiary of Brookfield Asset Management.
And change the main article for this category to Brookfield Properties.
Thanks! Dvruthven (talk) 13:55, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
Reply 13-NOV-2019
edit- The essential elements of information here — that the category relates to Brookfield and that Brookfield deals in properties — are not any more radically different after the name change of the base article than they were before the change. The requested changes are cosmetic in nature and do not fix anything which is actually (or potentially) broken — either in meaning (such as a radical change to the company's name which might confuse readers) or in formatting (such as a broken WikiLink).
Regards, Spintendo 20:07, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
- @Spintendo: Thank you for your quick response. That said, I believe my request to be substantive, not cosmetic. The category description, as it currently stands, is false - the name of the company is "Brookfield Properties" and it manages properties - it does not own them. To provide the most accurate source of information, I would think that errors should be corrected, even if trivial? Thank you again, Dvruthven (talk) 14:00, 14 November 2019 (UTC)