Talk:Criticism of Wal-Mart

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Criticism of Wal-Mart article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability
Archives: 1, 2

	Criticism of Wal-Mart has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment.
Article milestones Date Process Result September 18, 2008 Articles for deletion Kept December 1, 2006 Featured article candidate Not promoted April 1, 2007 Good article nominee Listed June 2, 2008 Good article reassessment Kept Current Status: Good article

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

WikiProject Organized Labour     (Rated GA-Class) This article is part of WikiProject Organized Labour, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Organized Labour. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. Organized Labour Portal GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale. Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale. If you have rated this article please consider adding assessment comments. WikiProject Retailing      (Rated GA-Class) This article is part of WikiProject Retailing, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to retailing companies and topics on Wikipedia. You can help out by editing the article attached to this page, and by visiting the project page where you can join the project and/or contribute to discussion. Retailing To-do: | edit | history | watch | purge Here are some tasks you can do: Copyedit: Target Corporation, Wal-Mart - to be used as an examples for ideal page structure Cleanup: T.J. Maxx reads like advert; see talk page discussion Expand: Store manager, List of articles on project page, image gallery on project page, Hypermarket (history section), Category killer - This is very US/Canada centric - Ikea exists elsewhere, too. Stubs: Wal-Mart Neighborhood Market, Archer Farms, ClearRx Other: Department store - discriminate between itself and Discount store. Category killer - If a Category Killer dominates its area, why are there many stores listed per category? There should be clear criteria for when a store is included, otherwise this just becomes an advertising page.

The following user(s) are actively contributing to this article and may be able to help with questions about verification and sources: Dr. Cash This in no way implies article ownership; all editors are encouraged to contribute.

To-do list for Criticism of Wal-Mart:	edit · history · watch · refresh
Here are some tasks you can do: Expand: Expand/cite/be specific on Wal-Mart sales of The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, including a mention of and a link to the ADL letter to Wal-Mart [1]

This is a controversial topic that may be under dispute. Please read this page and discuss substantial changes here before making them. Make sure to supply full citations when adding information and consider tagging or removing uncited/unciteable information.

Archives

2005 - 6/2006 7/2006 - 2007

Contents 1 Bias in product selection 2 Seems Biased 3 Debbie Shank 4 GA Sweeps—kept

[edit] Bias in product selection

I think this paragraph seems very out of place and very POV in the product selection section.

"While Wal-Mart's product selection may be seen by some as censorship, others view this from a free enterprise standpoint, that criticism of Wal-Mart's product selection is misguided because Wal-Mart is free to carry and sell whatever products it chooses and that customers are free to shop elsewhere, and would do so if they were in disagreement with its perceived moral values."

First off who are these 'others'? Is it Wal-Mart itself or not? This whole thing seems like an opinion piece whilst the rest of the section lists facts. In fact that section doesn't even mention censorship until this paragraph brings it up. I move to delete that section until we can get something better, like oh say an official stance from Wal-mart, (remember the rest of the section (for the most part) doesn't cite opinion until this one paragraph puts it in).Father Time89 (talk) 05:07, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

OK I just checked the source and not ONCE does it mention censorship or product placement so that means that the paragraph is unsourced and POV. I think I ahve reasonable grounds to delete it. If you disagree you can revert it and discuss it.Father Time89 (talk) 05:17, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Reverted. I disagree, and it's not POV. Furthermore, this statement is needed because without it, the section IS POV. Dr. Cash (talk) 16:37, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Well I'm getting rid of the source, which while relevant to the article as a whole, has absolutely nothing to do with the section.

I still don't see how it makes it NPOV since it doesn't cite who these 'others' are and it very much seems like something thrown in to defend Wal-Mart by some random person.Father Time89 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 22:21, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Seems Biased

The way this paragraph is worded leaves the impression that wal-mart critics have less factual evidence than economists. Just a thought.

Economists suggest that Wal-Mart is a success because it sells products at low prices that people want to buy, satisfying customer's wants and needs. However, Wal-Mart critics argue at the same time Wal-Mart's lower prices draw customers away from other businesses, "hurting the community."[11][12] 68.116.106.252 (talk) 00:33, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh, it's quite biased--towards the truth. The fact of the matter is, there IS absolutely zero valid evidence supporting the claims of these Wal-Mart critics. Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 21:49, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

That sounds like a very POV statement which is itself backed up by 0 evidence.Father Time89 (talk) 02:15, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

It is very biased to claim that Walmart is "hurting the community" by taking away business from mom and pop stores. That would imply that the Mom and Pop stores, with their higher prices and lower selection are better for consumers (the majority of the community) than a lower priced alternative. Look at what the prices are like in a community before a Walmart is there, then look at what the prices are like after one comes to town. Or for an even better example, look at what happens to the price of an item when Walmart stops carrying it. They stopped carrying firearms in California a few years ago, and prices doubled at the other stores in a matter of months. Competition is GOOD for the community. It makes all of our dollars go farther. ~~GTM —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gun toting monkeyboy (talk • contribs) 18:48, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Debbie Shank

Someone Add her story please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.134.73.132 (talk) 01:42, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Here's CNN's write-up. CKCortez (talk) 05:48, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] GA Sweeps—kept

This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. The article history has been updated to reflect this review. Regards, Ruslik (talk) 06:47, 2 June 2008 (UTC)