Talk:UBS/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

2008-09 U.S. Tax Evasion Controversy too limited

The dates are arbitrary (bank secrecy wasn't rolled back under U.S. pressure until 2010, and Raoul Weil wasn't extradited to the U.S. until late 2013), and limiting it to the U.S. ignores the fact that the Germans, the French and the EU became involved in pressuing UBS to surrender tax cheats.

I came here to add some more info on Raoul Weil, but it would make the section too big. Taking my cue from the rogue trader scandal section that comes after, I abridged the information on this page and created a new article that embraces the subject of UBS Tax Evasion Controversy. Please come and help me fill out the article.William (The Bill) Blackstone (talk) 02:45, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

URL for UBS PAGE is WRONG

The main UBS page file on Wikipedia servers is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB_AG. I do not know whom to tell to switch this from USB to UBS. I think it's a hangover from an earlier error in the article's text, since corrected.
Jerry-VA (talk) 21:46, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

4 Years Later: Strong Pages, Weak Tools?

It is 4 years since I began working (agitating?) to stop corporate sanitization of the UBS and Bradley Birkenfeld pages (see Birkenfeld TALK, "Wikipedia Balance", "Objectivity"). The community should be proud of what it went on to achieve. Perhaps some in UBS would even grudgingly concede that the broader article projects them as an even more powerful and consequential player on the global stage.

Other corporate pages remain sanitized by corporate employees -- e.g., Bechtel. Corporate editors often minimize or remove items that might provoke an inquiring mind to notice and pursue a dissonant view or an unsettling possibility.

IMHO, Wikipedia tools for edit conflicts between individuals (e.g., [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_revert_rule#The_three-revert_rule 3 reversions within 24 hours] remain inadequate for slow, steadfast, years-long sanitizing edits by a corporate "volunteer" with 9,999 more employees standing behind her, ready to step forward. Civility is never out of place, the TALK page is always needed, but calming tempers (e.g., classic edit wars, the Administrators' Notice Board https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:ANI) will not change corporate policy. Banning one corporate editor leaves a thousand other employees in place. The Single Purpose Account label on the editor's name https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:SPA may help; the Conflict of Interest label for entire articles https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:COI is less frequently seen with corporate sanitization, with articles stripped of breadth. Nevertheless, good job here, guys.
Jerry-VA (talk) 22:45, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Category - Mortgage Lender

I don't think this is accurate, might have been blowback from subprime crisis by an attack editor. If anyone objects let me know, others I will remove that category.--RalphDuggan (talk) 21:54, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

I see that it has been removed but bear in mind that Category:Subprime mortgage crisis should stay as UBS was a big player in that and suffered greatly, it would be inaccurate to categorize any other way. LivinRealGüd (talk) 05:27, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

Style

I found this article by way of fixing a typographical error. It looks like well over half of the text is hyperlinked to something. I didn't read the article, but this seems like sloppy use of hyperlinking. (Just because it's in Wikipedia doesn't mean that it needs a link!) Jkgree (talk) 19:22, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Agreed! I will begin removing this WP:OVERLINK in accordance with Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking. Feel free to join! LivinRealGüd (talk) 03:45, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

Okay, I've unlinked a lot. Let me know if there are any other problem areas. Looks a lot better now. Best, LivinRealGüd (talk) 03:51, 8 June 2018 (UTC)