Talk:Bre-X

message: "This article does not cite any references or sources."
How's that? The article cites four books and articles.
How come it says "does not cite any"? Four is definitely more than none! The box should be removed ASAP.
--anonymous 22:03, June 20th 2007 (CDT)
: Agreed, and I have removed the tag (to be fair perhaps it was added before the sources were listed and no one thought to remove it. WP:CITE does, however, require that actual chapter-and-verse citations be made for any statements located in the article, so while the "No sources" box was incorrect, another box may well replace it. Incidentally, since David Walsh does not, at present, have an article, it is worth reiterating that he is deceased, as are several other players in the Bre-X saga, and are therefore not subject to the WP:BLP policy, but statements regarding any living persons should be cited by those familiar with the source material. 23skidoo 04:21, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Early discussion, before references were in article 

message: :Image:Brexintro.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 Wikipedia articles 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 insure 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 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 16:45, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Brexintro.gif

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Bre-X. 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:
*Added  tag to http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=d5d283b0-d10d-4e23-8c91-3fd20bf1831e&k=24530
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.bre-x.com/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060907074019/http://www.osc.gov.on.ca:80/About/NewsReleases/2006/nr_20060209_osc-felderhof.jsp to http://www.osc.gov.on.ca/About/NewsReleases/2006/nr_20060209_osc-felderhof.jsp
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121102230805/http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=4fc6577c-a591-4271-8c38-259ee710e160&k=43240 to http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=4fc6577c-a591-4271-8c38-259ee710e160&k=43240
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:47, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Another IP editor is repeatedly removing the film section. Sorry the fact is that the film exists and has been widely reported as being based on the Bre-X story, although the producer has said otherwise. The article could have another ssentence about what the minor dispute over the film's origin, but the section as a whole stays as it is relevant. It's takes trivial to find five or ten excellent refs connecting the film to Bre-X.104.163.150.250 (talk) 10:19, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Film section 

message: This sentence needs clarification. 
"Bre-X went bankrupt November 5, 1997 although some of its subsidiaries like Bre-X continued until 2003."
:I flagged that sentence too.  But I think it's one of many editing problems, in fact this seems to be one of the worst edited wikipedia articles I've seen.  Another one: "Encouraging gold values were intersected in many drill-holes..."  I don't know what that means; maybe it means "Many drill-holes encountered gold veins"?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcswell (talk • contribs) 01:35, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Identical names. 

message: The editor quotes scientist Egizio Bianchini by saying he "considered the rumors "preposterous"." But the reference leads to this article where you can see that in context it is saying he was either lying or mistaken when he said that because, in the very next sentence, he "was eviscerated by investors and their lawyers when the fraud was exposed".  Leaving in this "fact" without noting that he was wrong when he said that is very misleading.  Honestly this whole article is kind of a perfect storm of manipulation.  Clearly there are three distinct points of view alternating sentences, one of which is a neutral perspective probably from editors doing what little they can to fix it. I think it belongs in a museum.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tabrown97 (talk • contribs) 02:19, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clear deception in Reference 16