Talk:Lingo (VoIP Service operator)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Isn't the long blurb about Primus's troubles completely out of place here? I mean the paragraph beginning with "In 2007, Primus Telecom admitted paying..."

This type of tangential information is not pertinent to the topic of Lingo. I have *no problem* with the information residing in the entry for Primus, but it does not belong here.

Just thought I'd ask for relevance before doing anything.

Hi - thanks for discussing before changing. Of the five paragraphs in the Lingo article, the second and third are really about parent Primus Telecom and could be deleted together. I saw the second paragraph as apparently PR, so I added the third for balance. The troubles at Primus are somewhat relevant to Lingo, given the many Lingo customer reports of dishonesty (which almost always starts at the top) and the marketing of 1-year prepaid contracts for service that Primus might be unable to fulfill. Also, the second paragraph cites no sources, while the third paragraph cites four. So, looking at paragraphs 2&3 as Primus assets (unsourced) and liabilities (sourced), I think if paragraph 3 is deleted then paragraph 2 should go with it.TVC 15 04:24, 20 September 2007 (UTC)