Talk:Smithfield Foods/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Edit request

Hello, my name is Jeremy and I am requesting an edit on behalf of Smithfield Foods. The third paragraph references "Smithfield and its subsidiaries" but Smithfield no longer has any formal subsidiaries. I would like to request that this be removed.

Jeremy Smithfield (talk) 14:28, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi Jeremy, first, please let us know who is paying you to contribute to Wikipedia. The client is Smithfield Foods, but the entity that is paying you must be disclosed too. See WP:PAID, which describes what is required by the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use.

Regarding your edit request, when you google "Smithfield Foods subsidiaries", Google returns a list at the top of Smithfield subsidiaries: Smithfield Packing Company, Murphy Brown LLC, Smithfield Romania, John Morrell & Co, etc. Bloomberg says of Murphy Brown, for example, that it "operates as a subsidiary of Smithfield Foods, Inc." [1] What are those companies now, if not subsidiaries? Please supply a non-company source for the edit. Many thanks, SarahSV ^(talk) 15:01, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Forgot to ping Jeremy Smithfield. SarahSV ^(talk) 15:04, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Understood, I have included the disclosure information on my user page. Here is an article that details the restructuring of Smithfield Foods under one corporate umbrella. [2] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeremy Smithfield (talk • contribs)

Thanks for the disclosure. I'm a bit concerned about your user name, because it implies that you might create, or have created, other names for other clients. If you've done that, please let us know, because it's important to stick to one account.

I'll take a look at the source later and will post something here. Thank you again for disclosing and abiding by our policies and guidelines. SarahSV ^(talk) 18:52, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

This article says of one of the subsidiaries, Circle Four: "The only thing changing is the name," the release stated. "There will be no impact on our workforce, and our business relationships and management structure within this division remain the same." It is now called "Smithfield Hog Production-Rocky Mountain Region". But is the name the only thing that has changed, or have these companies ceased to exist as independent entities? SarahSV ^(talk) 19:24, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Pinging Jeremy Smithfield. SarahSV ^(talk) 22:08, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Yes, the independent operating companies have ceased to exist. An additional reference [3] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeremy Smithfield (talk • contribs)

Jeremy Smithfield, I've removed the word "subsidiaries" from the lead, and added a paragraph about the Smithfield One initiative. I could find only PR-type stories about this, no financial reports. Bloomberg still lists these companies as independent. For example, Smithfield Packing Company Incorporated: "The Smithfield Packing Company Incorporated operates as a subsidiary of Smithfield Foods, Inc." [4] "Murphy-Brown, LLC operates as a subsidiary of Smithfield Foods, Inc. [5] Is that out of date? SarahSV ^(talk) 02:20, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

SlimVirgin Yes, that information is out of date. Here is Smithfield Food's financial release from the time of the change. See the section labeled Organizational Realignment. [6]Jeremy Smithfield (talk) 14:46, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

@Jeremy Smithfield: Thank you. Can you confirm that none of these companies exist now? Some of the overseas company websites are still working.

I'm concerned about the lack of independent sources. Are you aware of any news or business sources (non-PR sources) that reported this development?

Also, please sign your posts with four tildes ~~~~ (top left on the keyboard); that will give you a signature and timestamp. SarahSV ^(talk) 15:24, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Edit request 24-JAN-2018

My name is Jeremy and I am requesting an edit on behalf of Smithfield Foods. There should be an update made to the section under Pregnant Sows. Smithfield has recently announced that have fulfilled their commitment to group housing systems for pregnant sows on all U.S. company-owned farms. Here are two references: 1: http://www.newsobserver.com/news/business/article195357299.html

2: https://pilotonline.com/business/article_01836553-38ab-51e0-8710-fb2dbc117d3d.html

Jeremy Dalton (talk) 21:36, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Reply

There is a potential for confusion over the meaning of the term fulfilled. To ascertain whether something was fulfilled, you need to know exactly what was pledged to. At the time this pledge was made, what was the language used and what were the minimally accepted outcomes that the company had in mind for meeting the definitional requirement for fulfillment. The sources do not delineate this aspect of the company's pledge because they only covered the pledge's outcome. To understand the whole story we need to see sourcing that covered the pledge's initiation — in other words, what was pledged to be done on the day the pledge was made. Without both sides of the pledge being covered, Wikipedia should not unilaterally declare the pledge as being fulfilled with sources that only covered the latter half of the fulfillment process. Regards, Spintendo ᔦᔭ 01:14, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

• Hi Jeremy, I've updated the section, but the sources are a little unclear. My understanding is that Smithfield has either 200 or 500 farms in the United States on which it keeps sows (can you say how many?), and around 2,000 contract farms, also in the U.S. Around half its sows in the U.S. live on its contract farms, and the situation on the contract farms remains unchanged; the sows are still in gestation crates. On its company-owned farms, the sows now spend the first six weeks of the impregnation cycle in gestation crates, then move to pens, then move into farrowing crates—then move back into gestation crates for another impregnation cycle?

Re: the contract farms. Last year, the company said it was requiring the contract farms to follow the company-owned farms by 2022. Now the sources say the company is "recommending" that the contract farms change. Has Smithfield changed its statements or have the sources misinterpreted? If you could point to the most accurate secondary sources, that would be very helpful. SarahSV ^(talk) 05:07, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Request edit

I would like to request that the name of the Smithfield-Luter Foundation be changed to the Smithfield Foundation. It has not been referred to as to as the Smithfield-Luter Foundation in some time. Jeremy Dalton (talk) 13:33, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

References

Reply 10-OCT-2018

  Edit request implemented    Spintendo  17:08, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

Requested edit

I would like to request that the most recent edit to the first paragraph be reverted. It is more confusing and less accurate than the previous wording. WH Group is a publicly traded company and "Chinese-owned" could be confused to mean state-owned. Jeremy Dalton (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:53, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

I agree, as at first I took that sentence as meaning "owned by the state of China". – Þjarkur (talk) 19:27, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. Would you like to revert that edit? Jeremy Dalton (talk) 21:30, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Reply 16-MAY-2019

  Unable to implement  

• The passage in question is not described here verbatim, nor is a verbatim description of what the sentence should be changed to read as been provided.

Regards,  Spintendo  15:54, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

---

I have made the change as there weren't any objections here. – Þjarkur (talk) 20:21, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Recent mass reversion of edits

I strongly believe that reverting my edits en mass is extremely unproductive. May we revert and discuss problems on an individual basis? 219.73.60.102 (talk) 20:24, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for posting on the talk page. By all means go ahead and propose your edits, but do not revert. SarahSV ^(talk) 20:26, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

I have the same rights to edit as anyone else. While I am willing to discuss particular edits you object to. I will edit as I see fit, within the bounds of Wikipedia's rules. This will include reverting edits as appropriate. 219.73.60.102 (talk) 21:24, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

Sioux Falls plant closure due to coronavirus outbreak

Smithfield Foods has temporarily shut down their pork processing plant in Sioux Falls after 120 employees (per the union; 80 confirmed by Smithfield) have caught the coronavirus.  This accounts for almost 30% of the cases in Minnehaha County; Sioux Falls is the largest city in SD.  This comes after Smithfield offered a $500 bonus to employees who didn't miss work in April. Workers and the unions are protesting working conditions and the company's slow response.Penelope Gordon (talk) 22:04, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Offensive videos

Per Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Images#Offensive_images, this should be omitted. Video leaks are adequately described in prose, embedding the video in the article serves no purpose beyond shocking the reader. - MrOllie (talk) 15:23, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Please stop edit warring over this. While these undercover videos are gruesome, they are highly educational, and if they really could adequately be described with prose, judging from your past behaviour you'd probably remove that too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mariolovr (talk • contribs)

It takes two to edit war. What say we agree to leave these out per WP:BRD, until we can get a third opinion? - MrOllie (talk) 15:33, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

I oppose including these shock videos, per WP:DUE and WP:NPOV. Another problem is that, unlike text, they cannot be edited easily. Including them amounts to anti-meat POV pushing. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 15:38, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Agreed. There is room for criticism in this article, but these are undue. Mariolovr also needs to understand that Wikipedia does not work on a process of "Add what you want, then discuss if it stays in". It's the other way around. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 16:09, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Who says they're "shock videos"? Do you all have any sources saying this, or is it just your POV? The content itself may be shocking, but the filmography is done without any quick cuts or features typical of a shock video. If anything, they're educational videos with a notable slant. And what makes them "undue"? They're highly relevant depictions of the sections at hand. Doesn't removing undercover footage amount to censorship and "pro-meat POV pushing"?

Also, much more than just those videos were removed. What's up with that? Mariolovr (talk) 16:38, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Removal of neutrality tag

The neutrality tag references the above discussion of the censored videos. Please do not remove it until the issue has been resolved. (Normal Op) Mariolovr (talk) 00:27, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Wholly owned subsidiary

There has been an effort for some time to remove that the company is a wholly owned subsidiary of WH Group. Footnote (a) is also removed:

Form 10-K, United States Securities and Exchange Commission (January 3, 2016): "Smithfield Foods, Inc., together with its subsidiaries ... is the largest hog producer and pork processor in the world. ... On September 26, 2013 ... the Company merged with Sun Merger Sub, Inc., a Virginia corporation and wholly owned subsidiary of WH Group ... As a result of the Merger, the Company [Smithfield] survived as a wholly owned subsidiary of WH Group."

Writing from memory, IPs resolving to Hong Kong and Mumbai have been removing this. SarahSV ^(talk) 17:23, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

IPs from those locations have also been removing some work I've done on their controversial sections. Mariolovr (talk) 17:26, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

@SlimVirgin: Looks like they're at it (yet) again. <sigh> And it seems HK isn't really part of China. Or something... — UncleBubba ^{( T @ C )} 19:09, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Fake CEO interview

I edited the coronavirus segment regarding the false interview on Fox Business https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Smithfield_Foods&oldid=995991099. Smithfield Chief Administrative Officer Keira Lombardo called the segment a “complete lapse,” defending the company’s animal welfare practices and Covid-19 pandemic response from Johnson’s criticism.https://www.forbes.com/sites/joewalsh/2020/12/23/fox-host-maria-bartiromo-punked-by-activist-posing-as-smithfield-foods-ceo/?sh=3dac31ed36b7 P37307 (talk) 23:27, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Update Smithfield Key People in Right Column

Change Key people Kenneth M. Sullivan (CEO) to Key people: Dennis Organ (CEO) Lobsmithfield (talk) 14:28, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

 Done. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 08:45, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

Update to Smithfield Foods Leadership - effective December 2020

Kenneth Sullivan has been the president and chief executive officer of Smithfield Foods since December 2015 and executive director of WH Group since January 2016.[18] Gregg Schmidt is the president for hog production. Darek Nowakowski is the president of Smithfield's European operations.[1] As of February 2020, Kraig Westerbeek was head of Smithfield Renewables.[85] Wan Long, Kenneth Sullivan, and Jiao Shuge all serve on Smithfield's board of directors.[1]

should be:

Dennis Organ was named president and chief executive officer of Smithfield Foods in December 2020. John Sargent is the executive vice president for hog production. Luis Cerdan is the executive vice president of Smithfield's European operations. Lobsmithfield (talk) 14:25, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

I'm taking the entire section out. A CEO in the infobox is enough. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 08:46, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 2 February 2021

Change: Kenneth Sullivan has been the president and chief executive officer of Smithfield Foods since December 2015 and executive director of WH Group since January 2016.[18]

To:Dennis Organ has been the president and chief executive officer of Smithfield Foods since December 2020. Lobsmithfield (talk) 15:58, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

 Partly done: The addition is broadly correct, but smithfield's website only says "late 2020", and reliable sources (e.g. here) seem to put the date at November 27 2020, so that is the date I've gone with. Volteer1 (talk) 16:11, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

Maxwell Foods missing

After reading the Guardian's piece on Maxwell Foods, I expected this article to mention the case, at least in passing, in the Lawsuits section.

Someone may care to craft some summary from these sources:

• Guardian article
• Maxwell vs Smithfield case: dockets up to October 30, 2020
• North Carolina court order of significance: MAXWELL FOODS, LLC v. SMITHFIELD FOODS, INC., 2021 NCBC ORDER 11
• North Carolina court Business Court Opinion: MAXWELL FOODS, LLC v. SMITHFIELD FOODS, INC., 2021 NCBC 50
• Maxwell Foods statement on goldsborodailynews

-84user (talk) 16:00, 5 September 2021 (UTC)