Talk:BNP Paribas

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Question[edit]

Hello,

I'm a new Wikipedia user, so I don't want to make beginner's mistakes, but maybe somebody more experienced can enlighten me and help me make edits as appropriate.

Isn't the sentence

"BNP Paribas has one of the highest credit ratings in its peer group with the long term debt of the group currently ranked A+ by S&P, A2 by Moody's and A+ by Fitch."

subjective, and possible advertising?

Moreover, the link given as a reference

http://www.fitchratings.com/corporate/ratings/issuer_content.cfm?issr_id=80359629

seems to be broken.

User7920 (talk) 12:00, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

  • I think your assessment is valid. This page may be of assistance if you are doubting whether or not to edit: WP:BRD. Also, WP:REF explains how references function in wikipedia. Vrac (talk) 15:07, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

BNP Paribas conviction[edit]

As other editor already mentioned, the addition of the same content in three different sections seems a little too much. Nobody can deny BNP Paribas was found guilty of charge, but I think saying it three times is indeed bashing or, more clearly, a violation of NPOV policy. Thoughts? --Urbanoc (talk) 11:36, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

The "Sanctions violations" section already provides significant coverage of this event, it looks like it just needs to be updated to reflect the final terms of the conviction. The new section added in "History" is out of chronological sequence, has an excessively long title (with improper capitalization), and gives WP:UNDUE weight given the existing content. The quote from a press release from the DOJ isn't ideal because it is an involved party. It can be referenced for the facts but there is no lack of coverage of this event in reliable, independent sources, citing those would be preferable to using the press release. The brief mention at the end of the history section serves as a "lead" to notify readers of the content in the "Sanctions violations" section. Vrac (talk) 13:43, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
There's no so much significative development in the case beyond that already mentioned in "Sanctions violations", at least I didn't find something relevant searching through the web. We just need to update the wording as BNP Paribas indeed pleaded guilty. Perhaps, we can also include the $140 million fine and the chairman's resignation led by all this (http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/05/01/us-bnp-paribas-settlement-sentencing-idUSKBN0NM41K20150501, http://www.wsj.com/articles/bnp-paribas-to-pay-140-million-fine-in-sanctions-case-1430508971 and http://www.france24.com/en/20140927-france-bnp-paribas-banks-chairman-prot-resigns). The new DOJ source is only a detailed, legalese-style account of the same things already covered, better third-party sources if available. --Urbanoc (talk) 01:52, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on BNP Paribas. 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}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:47, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Armin S.[edit]

The main coverage of the BNP mistrade is at BNP, as it should be. The unnamed individual's notability is entirely derivative of the issue within BNP. Additionally, it's hard to have an encyclopedia entry about somebody without a name (not impossible, but it's preferable to use the well-known BNP article). 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 10:10, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

  • Support per nom. I guess discussion wasn't even required for this merger.Yashovardhan (talk) 15:59, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on BNP Paribas. 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.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:24, 13 July 2017 (UTC)