Wikipedia

Talk:Criticism of Tesco/Archive 1

< Talk:Criticism of Tesco
Latest comment: 7 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified
Archive 1

Facebook employees group

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Do people feel that the facebook group, where tesco employees criticised the company and its customers should be included in this article? Or is that criticism of individuals rather than the company itself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.2.121.60 (talk) 00:21, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

It is a self-published source and therefore would not regarded here as reliable. Rodhullandemu 18:13, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

National protests

Latest comment: 15 years ago7 comments6 people in discussion

Tesco is as big a threat to rural towns as Dr Beeching.

Remember how, in the mid '60s, Dr Beeching's rail cuts axed many branch lines and cut off hundreds of small towns from the main network? Tesc is trying to build a super store in the middle of our small town of Ilkley, W Yorks. We stood up to Beeching in 1965 and saved our railway, now we have another fight against a giant who will kill the life blood of this beautiful town. This habit of Tesco to use its financial might to kill off all opposition must be stopped. See Yorkshire Post April 9 2009Mauracampbell (talk) 10:44, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

"Tesco's 2004 Adminstore acquisition led to local and national protests." "National" meaning which country?martianlostinspace 18:59, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Changed "national" to "UK-wide". The reference refers to the Office of Fair Trading, a British agency.martianlostinspace 19:01, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Well I could be pedantic and point out that UK is the UK of GB and NI and I can't remember any opposition in Northern Ireland to the move. However that is indeed being pedantic so I won't! Mark83 19:53, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

I can't believe their poor use of grammar is in this list of criticisms! Surely this should be placed in the trivia section or some section like that.--Mofs 18:50, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

What an inane page this is. e.g. Criticism about misspelling "dessert" on a sign! Some contibutors need to get out more.--WikiMart (talk) 18:22, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Tesco has become renowned for its grammatical howlers. IMO the company's status as the UK's largest retailer means it has a duty not to contribute to the worsening standard of written English. Its employees who are responsible for public communication shouldn't be in the job if they don't know the basics. Chris 42 (talk) 12:25, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Wixley or Mixley?

Latest comment: 15 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Neither have articles. Which one is correct? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.28.35.72 (talk) 22:16, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

I was wondering this too, however I cannot find any reference to either company on internet searches. BlueViper555 (talk) 21:41, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
Judging by a news website source here, and some more searches, it seems that Wixley exists but MIxley doesn't. SD5 11:53, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Queuing times

Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

In December 2006 The Grocer magazine published a study which named Tesco as having the slowest checkouts of the six major supermarkets. Somerfield had the shortest queues with an average wait of 4 min 23 seconds. In order of least time spent at the checkout, the other major supermarkets were Waitrose, Sainsbury's, Asda, Morrisons.

This seems very odd. I am on the road most days for work, and I tend to pick up shopping in whatever supermarket I happen to be nearest to at the end of the day. Having tried Tesco, Sainsburys and Asda stores in places as diverse as Preston, Birmingham, Kent, South Wales, and Liverpool, I found that the only one where I never had to queue for more than about 1 minute was Tesco. The worst offender was Asda, where I frequently had to spend upwards of 15 minutes waiting (mostly because the checkout staff were more interested in chatting with their mates than in serving the customers). I would suspect that "The Grocer" magazine is institutionally anti-Tesco, and most likely "played" with the data somewhat! Either that or I have been very lucky, but it seems odd that I encountered the same (good) service levels irrespective of where the Tesco store was located...... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.198.33.252 (talk) 14:51, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Damage Limitation Exercise

Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Look at the early talk pages of articles on Frank Goodwin and Bell Pottinger, and you can clearly see a pattern of PR work going on, these organisations were caught out by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism as well as Wikipedia for deliberately stage managing a damage limitation exercise. In the case of Tesco, its no different. Where there is warranted criticism of an organisation that has a history of exploitation and Zealous PR management, it has every right to be highlighted so that the reader has every right to exercise his or her right to information Pg1nux (talk) 14:04, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

I've been cleaning up some deeply non-neutral content. This is not because I'm employed by tesco or by any PR agency, or even because I particularly care about Tesco, but because I'm passionate about having neutral articles. Of course, some people really want to publish a laundry-list of negative comments about tesco; but accusing others of being paid shills is not the best way forward.
At least I assume that's the point you're getting at, but it's hard to be sure; because the Bell Pottinger and Frank Goodwin articles have nothing to do with Tesco, nor does the Bureau of Investigative Journalism. Is there a more concrete point that you'd like to make? bobrayner (talk) 14:40, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Shed

Latest comment: 9 years ago4 comments4 people in discussion

It seems that this article has become a dumping-ground for any attack on Tesco, from minor spelling mistakes (which are not notable) to poorly-sourced negative material. Although not being covered by WP:BLP, WP:LIBEL still applies, and everything that is said here requires both encyclopedic relevance and scrupulous sourcing. Accordingly, I've removed some of the worst offending sections. As for citing litigation, we have a way of citing Law Reports which should be followed; even Unreported cases should give a date and a County Court location to satisfy verifiability policy. I don't even shop in Tesco, but not for the wrong reasons, so I have no axe to grind here. --Rodhullandemu 18:26, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

I have changed some of the tone and wording so it is less accusing in nature. A few sources were added to. 90.244.80.84 (talk) 22:39, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Can someone please explain why an encyclopedia requires this page?

It just seems like a useless page to attack a company. Why on Earth do we need this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.207.158.10 (talk) 09:37, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

I'd guess it's because the subject is notable enough to have many references in reliable sources, but inclusion of all such information within the main article at Tesco#Criticism would give undue weight there. This applies for similar criticism articles elsewhere on the encyclopedia. Is that any help? -- Trevj (talk) 03:39, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Cannot never be in compliance with the neutrality policy

Latest comment: 8 years ago5 comments4 people in discussion

I have added the POV tag because this article can never be neutral since its title puts the company on the defensive. All articles of this class are irredeemably in breach of the neutrality policy and should therefore be deleted. If they are not deleted, the tag needs to stay in place permanently to at least ameliorate this problem. Postlebury (talk) 13:15, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

This is not necessarily true. There is extensive criticism of Tesco, and therefore this has been spun off from the main Tesco article. Reporting on the criticism in an NPOV way is quite possible. Removing all reporting of criticism of anyone and anything would render WP mindless fact-driven pap. (Consider battle of Waterloo for example.) For that reason I'm removing the tag. Rich Farmbrough, 22:30, 30 May 2011 (UTC).
I have changed some of the tone and wording so it is less accusing in nature. A few sources were added to. 90.244.80.84 (talk) 22:44, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Also see Criticism of Coca-Cola.90.244.80.84 (talk) 00:28, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
I removed some non sourced old accusations. 88.107.61.159 (talk) 22:00, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 11 external links on Criticism of Tesco. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:57, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Criticism of Tesco. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:45, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Criticism of Tesco. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:55, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Criticism of Tesco. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:02, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Criticism of Tesco. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:03, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Criticism of Tesco. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:42, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 15 external links on Criticism of Tesco. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:39, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Criticism of Tesco. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:33, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Criticism_of_Tesco/Archive_1&oldid=1030981561"