Talk:Tata Steel Europe
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Tata Steel Europe article.|
|This article is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. Click [show] for further details.|
|This article is written in British English (colour, realise, travelled), and some terms used in it are different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.|
as a part of this their is the cogent group as well including the steelmakers as well as the lamination units
Please let'd not jump the gun. I have removed all references to Tata Steel having 'bought' Corus Group because the deal is not yet complete. The result of the auction process was a revised and final offer, this has since been recommended to shareholders but still needs to be accepted at a formal EGM and ratified before it can be concluded. The EGM will likely be called by around mid-march. Hackerjack 15:36, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- As reported by news agencies today (http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/04/03/ap3576517.html), the takeover is complete. --Blacksun 11:44, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Removed Mittal Affair section as Mittal has never been part of Corus, merely a competitor. The Mittal Affair had nothing to do with Corus and should not be included here. Corusnewmedia (talk) 12:04, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
- Did a quick search and yes, the incident has links to Corus Group. -SilverOrion (You talk way too much!)
Fair use rationale for Image:Corus logo.gif
Image:Corus logo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
Image copyright problem with Image:British Steel.png
The image Image:British Steel.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
- That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
- That this article is linked to from the image description page.
Including material about Mittal and Blair
Canol wanted a discussion about the removal of the material, so here it is. It makes no sense to include material about Mittal and Blair in an article about Corus. Can't make out what the point is, other than maybe somehow slandering Corus by some tenuous association. The only place the word Corus appears in this paragraph is "major global competitor of Britain's own struggling steel industry, Corus, formerly known as British Steel." By this logic, this paragraph should be included in all of British Steel's major competitors. While you are at it, don't forget to include a paragraph about Tony Rezko (Obama's former friend) in the article about John McCain (Obama's competitor), etc. etc. Steel2009 (talk) 02:56, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
A well reasoned argument above, I've also looked at the ref's and there is no direct causal link from the PMs letter to actual job losses at Corus. Although I will not delete the section, I now have no objection if Steel2009 or anyone else wants to. Canol (talk) 19:11, 19 January 2010 (UTC)