Talk:GIC (sovereign wealth fund)

message: The recent addition to the content of this page is clearly one of opinion rather than an unbiased reporting of facts, hence the NPOV tag. Paulmallon (talk) 13:24, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok i removed the offending sentences. I didn't see they were added recently. Took off the tag. In the future, it's best just to remove the problem rather then tagging. --Patrick (talk) 13:59, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I wanted a second opinion before simply deleting the post, but fair enough. Paulmallon (talk) 10:08, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Recent Change

message: Reluctant to delete the recently added material since there seems to be a fair bit of content there, but the statistics need citations, and statements like "famously", "heinous fiasco" and "foolishly" are clearly non-neutral. Helenabella (talk) 06:52, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV & Citation Problems

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB125418236117447877. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)
For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  Diannaa (talk) 17:03, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed 

message: Hi! I am a GIC employee and intend to make a number of factual edits to this page, to update available information (e.g. performance figures as per the latest GIC Report) and reflect key developments at the firm, such as the appointment of five Chief Investment Officers. Some dead links need to be removed and factual inaccuracies have to be corrected. The handful of investments which are mentioned are dated, some from over a decade ago, and should be replaced with newer examples (e.g. student housing investments etc.). I also intend to include new sections on GIC's 'Investment Outlook', which has been widely covered in media articles which I will be linking to (such as this and this), and on GIC's 'Community Programmes' - 'Sparks & Smiles' and 'The Purple Symphony'. These additional details should be of interest to the Wikipedia community at large. Thank you. Annaamycol (talk) 07:55, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you Annaamycol. Appreciate the disclosure and effort taken to communicate with fellow Wikipedians. Information of past investments should be moved to the history section and not removed entirely from the article. I'm uncertain about the significance of the interactive e-book and whether it should be included in this article. It might be better to quote a line or two from the book to shed some light on the history of the organisation? Also, Wikipedia editors with COI are strongly discouraged from editing affected articles directly. Nonetheless, if you intend to add PR mention of its non-core community programmes on Wikipedia, please stay factual and don't give it undue weight and too much of a PR spin. Secondary news sources is preferred over self-published sources too. The reason why I'm saying this is because I've noticed that the Temasek Holdings/Temasek Foundation/Temasek Cares articles are pretty messed up and unencyclopedic with too much information dumped from financial reports, which makes it extremely tedious to navigate and edit for layman editors, I hope the GIC article won't go down the same route.NoCringe (talk) 05:10, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disclosure before editing