Talk:Aldi
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles related to Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks. | |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
|
|
|
[edit] Preferential treatment for US/UK websites?
I recently reorganised and expanded the Aldi article's External links section (also here).
-
- User:Doco removed the links to all (non-German) international subsidiary websites, except those for the UK and US.
- I reverted this.
- The next day, Doco removed all international subsidiary links except the US & UK ones.
- I then removed the links to the US/UK sites, saying Either include all or no international subsidiary websites. The US and UK are not "special".
- Doco reverted this, saying: This is the English-language wikipedia, dear IP vandal..
- I reverted this, saying: rv: Your belief that US/UK entities are supposed to get preferential treatment in this encyclopedia is mistaken. And quit the unfounded name calling. Even if you were right: What about Australia/Eire?
- I'm pretty sure Doco will revert again, and I could of course revert him again, but I don't want to get bogged down. Which brings me to this page. Please comment: Should US/UK entities get preferential treatment in this encyclopedia? If not, I believe we should either include all or none of Aldi's international subsidiary websites. It would also be cool if other people could watch the article: I don't think it's good for me to get any more entangled there. 86.56.48.12 18:28, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
The question of whether the U.S. / U.K. are special is irrelevant to the goals of Wikipedia, in my opinion. Unless User:Doco can make a case that removing the non US/UK links furthers the content or clarity of the information, I'm predisposed to say that more information is better than less, and thus we should leave the links in. I'll watch the page as well.Chrisbbehrens 03:07, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
- I think we should include none of the subsidiary websites, and have removed them. Including particular ones is systemic bias, based on guesswork of what the reader will want to be linked to. They are all available under the first external link anyway, and the external links section should be kept to a minimum (per WP:EL). Trebor 18:09, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
- Setting WP:EL aside for a moment, I think the preference should be for English speaking sites. If you link to a page on a French or Italian site, it wouldn't do me any good - in fact, I couldn't even confirm that the link is even relevant to the article. I don't think we should believe an English site over another language, but if I had to chose 3 sites out of 10 or 100 to link to, I think that we should chose 3 English speaking sites, as those are ones that will be of the most use to an English speaking audience. If a link to a non-English language site is absolutely necessary, then add a second link in the same line that points to a Babelfish translation. Yes, I'm aware that there are multi-lingual Wikipedia readers, but there are also other languages for Wikipedia as well. The policy is that articles are English-only, so EL's should be English-only as well. -- TomXP411[Talk] 06:06, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
"In the United States, Aldi often locates its stores in areas with cheap property, which is often synonymous with proximity to high concentrations of impoverished minorities." Um, do you have some statistics to back up this assertion? I have seen them in all sorts of locations with all sorts of population demographics.
[edit] My change regarding Aldi not raising prices after increase in VAT
I erased the following sentence:
- "Likewise, in late 2006, the company announced it would not be raising its prices in Germany, despite an increase in value-added tax from 16 to 19 percent in 2007."
Aldi actually only said they would not raise most of its prices. And while they kept their promise, that was not very surprising, because they mostly sell food and drinks and other items of daily life. The VAT for those goods had been and remained at 7%, no increase in 2007. So while their slogan was true, it does not serve as an example of how to build a reputation by using transparent pricing schemes. It's just advertisement. Blur4760 19:50, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Competitors Section
Is the Competitors Section really necessary? It's going to get pretty messy, as people are already listing American supermarket chains (of which there are COUNTLESS). Eventually the list could number in the thousands when supermarkets from every country that has an Aldi appear. Perhaps only "Top Competitors" by country would make more sense. 70.135.223.251 08:29, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
To use DiCaprio's words in Catch Me If You Can: I concur. Blur4760 14:46, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
