Wikipedia

Talk:Siemens/Archive 1

< Talk:Siemens
Latest comment: 4 years ago by Timtempleton in topic Scandal in lead
Archive 1

bit about the nazis

Latest comment: 11 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

im taking out the bit that says "the siemens logo can still be seen above the gas chambers in buchenwald" since it is actually a common misconception that buchenwald had gas chambers, it had an execution chamber where they were suffocated, not gassed —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.100.212.182 (talk) 23:47, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Excuse my ignorance, but what is the difference between suffocation and gassing? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.0.86.162 (talk) 04:38, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
Suffocation = the oxygen is removed, Gassing = some sort of poison gas is added --12.31.160.200 (talk) 15:30, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Redirect to company or dab page?

Latest comment: 13 years ago7 comments4 people in discussion

We should talk about changing this redirect before doing so. . . I think it makes sense to point to the company, I believe most people will be looking for it (or one of its products). Why should we change that? (John User:Jwy talk) 00:37, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Here's why I would like to change it:
1. In my case, I wasn't looking for the company at all. I had clicked on a link in a molecular biology article that used the unit as a measure of conductivity, and found myself looking an article about the company. It took some poking around to find what I was looking for.
2. I think that since the redirect is likely to affect other articles, and since it may be difficult to ascertain which articles will be affected, redirecting to the disambiguation page is safest.
3. Redirecting to Siemens AG needlessly promotes the company by redirecting users who may be looking for something else.
4. Do we have any evidence that most people on Wikipedia will be looking for Siemens AG? I would think that people looking for the company would google the company website.
5. Redirecting to (disambiguation) doesn't hurt anything: the link to Siemens AG is prominently featured on the disambiguation page.
Webbbbbbber (talk) 19:41, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
The link in the molecular biology article should be fixed (and any other link intending to link to other-than-the-company) to direct to the article directly. This would be the case no matter what we do this redirect. You should never have gotten here. Articles should (almost) never link to a disambiguation page. I'll start cleaning that up. If most people are looking for the company, directing it to the company is the best thing to do. It has nothing to do with promoting it over anything else. And if we change the redirect, the "prominent position" of Siemens AG on the disambiguation page will change. Have a look at WP:MOSDAB for some of the more detailed thinking here.
Item 4 is where I think some discussion could take place. I tend to think most people, when entering Siemens in the search box, will be looking for the company. Not that its conclusive, but the first two pages of a google search are all for the company. Which of the other articles do you think will be nearly as popular? (John User:Jwy talk) 04:20, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your input and consideration!
I wasn't aware that articles shouldn't link to the disambiguation page, but that makes sense.
As far as popularity goes, the only links I can see as being reasonably popular are: Siemens AG, Siemens (unit), and Siemens (train). All the others are names of people, and I think WP users seeking those people are likely to use first and last name in their search.
It sounds like you are fairly familiar with WP style, which I am still learning. Is it fairly common for [Topic] to link to [Topic (disambiguation)], or is that generally frowned upon?. Is it acceptable practice to redirect to a disambiguation page for 24-72 hours and look at the traffic to determine article popularity? It would be really easy to see which Siemens people are after by (temporarily) redirecting to the disambiguation page, then checking the traffic of each main article. Or are experiments along these lines verboten? Webbbbbbber (talk) 21:19, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
And thanks for "listening." I actually haven't used any of the statistics actually, so I don't know what works. And I'm not sure 24-72 hours is long enough - don't know how often anyone is looking for these guys. I have never seen anyone experiment like that. I'm actually pretty certain most people will be looking for the company - they have quite a "presence" on American TV, at least, and the name is spewed across many a footballer's jersey in Europe. The train is made by the same company. And the unit is pretty specialized. I would love to see statistics, but I don't need them here.
My criteria there (which I just came up with myself and some are pushing back on a little) is that if any one article is the desired article more than ALL the rest, then it should be the primary target. I truly think that is the case here.
Thing to Thing (disambiguation) is quite normal when there is no primary article agreed upon. You want people entering "Thing" to get to the dab page and it is arguably clearer to have the page name actually include the (disambiguation). If you want that, the only way to do it is to redirect as you say! But it doesn't HAVE to be that way. Sometimes - because of the way the history went, the redirect goes the other way and that works okay, too. Both work getting the user to their desired information quickly, which is the main goal of dab pages. (John User:Jwy talk) 06:08, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
I agree that most people might be interested in Siemens AG, but, Simens (unit) is a preferred SI unit of conductance, and as such it might be referred to in more wikipedia pages than the company. There is no reason folks who are trying to figure out what 2.8 siemens per cm² means have to click twice, whereas the people who are interested in the company get to their destination automatically. Since wikipedia is expanding rapidly, and as more and more data is pulished, at some point (if not already) the number of references to siemens (unit) will outweigh those to the company, whose representation in wikipedia seems to be more or less stable at this time. I vote to redirect this page to Simens (disambiguation)]]. Otherwise, I am sure, this will be coming up again and again in the future. Xenonice (talk) 15:44, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
The number of references to the unit is a consequence of it being a common unit of measurement, not anything to do with its notability or the likelihood that someone coming to Wikipedia would like information on it. More importantly, it has little to do with the effect the redirect would have on Wikipedia's quality, which is affected by its usability ( among other things). I don't think one would come away with the impression that favorable bias exists in this article. If tomorrow SI changed the fundamental unit of conductance to Microsofts, then wikipedia should not redirect to a disambiguation page, and I think that an analogous situation exists here.98.240.67.27 (talk) 18:25, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Why do we have to talk about Nazi ties?

Latest comment: 9 years ago9 comments9 people in discussion

Here's why: because it's unambiguously, famously German. Nothing of it can be claimed by and for another nation, as is often done with German accomplishments, inventions, dishes, etc. Since they can't steal it, they bash it. That's wikipedia for you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.166.205.146 (talk) 21:42, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes, a lot of companies did business with the Nazis, and yes, a lot of individuals worked for the Nazis. Now, just as we don't punish posterities of those who worked with the Nazis, did business with Nazis or were Nazis themselves, shouldn't we just learn to move on and stop adding hate-material about who did business with whom? I would say a large number of companies (and people) that existed in Germany in those times benefited from the Nazis, directly or indirectly. And the nation has paid the price for it. What happened then was sad, tragic, inhuman, but we have to draw the line somewhere while discussing history's relevance to the present. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nineworthies (talk • contribs) 20:43, 16 September 2008 (UTC)


To ignore and cover up history because it's unpleasant would be a mistake. Siemens contributed to the extermination of millions. To ignore this fact and leave the Nazi ties out of the article would be anti-Semitic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dlambe3 (talk • contribs) 00:21, 10 January 2010 (UTC)


Declaring an interest as a siemens employee and not editing, I think that in a historic artical about siemens it would be amiss not to mention its wartime history. Siemens growth as a company and post war strength were as a direct result of war time contracts, including the use of slave labour. Sure, the same goes for a lot of german companies, but it would be like not mentioning the licensing of DOS in a microsoft article - it was a major engine behind initial growth. I agree that putting a sentence like "like a lot of german companies at the time" might give context, as the story of any german company growing from that era is similar. 80.7.72.146 (talk) Another Siemens employee, I would suggest the addition of a reference to a fund announced by Siemens in 1998 to compensate victims of slave labour. See reference at http://articles.latimes.com/1998/sep/24/news/mn-26067. The reference is a reputable newspaper (LA Times) and is credible journalism in that it mentions both sides of the story, both the compensation offer and mention of the history of slave labour, also comments with quotes on Siemens motives in offering the compensation.192.75.238.215 (talk) 21:15, 2 May 2012 (UTC)


Siemens helped to build the concentration camps and used slave labour. That goes beyond co-operating with the national government to active collusion in crimes against humanity. This company's grim criminal past should not be wiped away because it happened a long time ago and a lot of people were doing it.--Korona (talk) 17:48, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

See this image recently donated by the German government from 1943:

 

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.199.237.76 (talk) 14:33, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

- Personally I want to learn more about Siemens involvement with the Nazis. This isn't supposed to simply be a venue of proper and acceptable content. I want to know about the Nazi involvement of all the peoples and companies involved. The brief mention as it is currently is far too insufficient. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Agather (talk • contribs) 18:55, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Secret Meeting of 20 February 1933 may be of interest to you as a start.Shortfatlad (talk) 19:32, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Again we found in Wikipedia a measurement of two different kinds: While in every German based company it has to be pointed out that it has had an involvement with NAZI Germany, for any US based company it will - very convieniently - be forgotten to mention. Two examples: IBM and Coca Cola. As long as we do not see there detailed information about their connection with NAZI Germany, there is no need to show it here.

For those who do not know: IBM sold custom made punch card machines which NAZI Germany used for the administration of killing all people in concentration camps - the numbers tattoed on the arms of the victims are the number provided by IBM registration machine. IBM still delivered in 1945 those machines. Coca Cola stopped delivering Cola to Germany but needed to participate in the European market to increase profit - so they invented Fanta to deliver it to NAZI Germany. Factories using salvery workes filled this into bottels. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.140.245.34 (talk) 16:00, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

FAQ

Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

So is Aeneon, Infineon and Qimonda brandnames of Siemens AG? divisions of Siemens? or are they now spun off companies, by spun off I mean they Siemens conglomerate no longer have any control. Like XGI which spun off from SiS. --Ramu50 (talk) 02:20, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Bribery Overhaul

[1] [2]

These are two websites that both have the same article published from the New York Times newspaper, and both have the Frontline interview of Reinhard Siekaczek, an employee from Siemens who oversaw the international pay offs to foreign officials to secure business contracts from competeing companies.

I was astounded to find just a measley paragraph on this, as Siemens has been fined $2.6 billion, the most for a company on international bribery. Although, compared to the 2008 global revenue of Siemens, $110.82 billion, this is a mere bargain!

So, I want to adress the need for an overhaul on this section; implementing facts from the two links posted above as references. Please help me do this, and please give me your take on what should be done.--LCoolo 04:42, 30 December 2008 (UTC)


Who is Charlotte?

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

End of 'Post WW2' section talks of bringing jobs to Charlotte. Is anyone able to add something to clarify this? Why did they bring all these jobs to some unknown woman? To be serious, I discovered that Charlotte is a town is the US & assume this is what the writer meant but is there a Charlotte anywhere else it could be. Also, what doing. If this cannot be firmed up I feel that this paragraph should be deleted as it says so little in the overall doings of a business as massive as siemens. kimdino (talk) 02:45, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

DASA != Defence Analytical Services Agency

Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I doubt very much that the Defence Analytical Services Agency, a statistical office in the British Ministry of Defence, would buy a sizable industrial operation. I think this actually refers to what was at the time Deutsche Aerospace AG, often abbreviated to DASA for Deutsche AeroSpace AG:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DaimlerChrysler_Aerospace — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.173.127.249 (talk) 12:05, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

monetary units and anonymous IPs

Latest comment: 15 years ago5 comments5 people in discussion

I said it before, no English-speaking country uses Euros, so pounds or dollars are appropriate. Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 16:50, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Official annual report has been made in euros, so there's no point to convert the currency in other currencies. All financial info should be in the official form and currency, not in any converted currencies.

That argument about no English-speaking country has no point at all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.27.59.237 (talk) 18:03, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

I am not sure if I am right but would it not make more sense to put 77.327 billion € as the revenue? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.133.23.176 (talk) 03:31, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Thats odd, I thought Ireland was an english speaking country... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 136.206.1.17 (talk) 15:41, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

This is absolute the silliest thing I have ever read. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.246.3.14 (talk) 05:03, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Cleanup!

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

First half seems ok then just a lot of lists - with no context or references - eg acquisistions and mergers starts in 2000, list of clients gives no context, list of products - somewhere else maybe? (categories?), list of competitors no context.Shortfatlad (talk) 22:01, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Removal

Latest comment: 15 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Support of Iran’s nuke program

In 2009, German customs officials intercepted a Siemens shipment of compressors on it's way to Iran. The compressors sent by Siemens were meant to be used as part of Iran's nuclear program. Siemens officials declined to directly address the report. ref>[3]</ref>

If someone wants to have a go at writing this in a neutral fashion please feel free. It would also help if the link was to the original source, not a source that would tend to show bias.Shortfatlad (talk) 19:28, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

This is the link [4]Shortfatlad (talk) 19:30, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
The only statement of fact in the sources is that a Siemens shipment to Iran was intercepted and that it possibly violated export restrictions. In no way can in be concluded from these sources that Siemens supports the Iran nuclear program.--Atlan (talk) 20:15, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Potentially the info may be relevant to Sanctions against Iran, however I would prefer to wait and see if this actually becomes a major scandal (such as those already covered in the article) or a "storm in a teacup".Shortfatlad (talk) 00:06, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Removal - clients

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Removed this list - problem is that is without any context - ie date, product supplied etc, would be suitable if made better, note it's relatively likely that a large percentage of anything using electricity will incorporate in part, some product from siemens.

Sf5xeplus (talk) 12:09, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Company divisions

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Siemens#Key_business_areas_and_subsidiary_companies_before_2009 doesn't match http://www.siemens.com/press/pool/de/pr_cc/2007/11_nov/axx20071116e.pdf

Also fails to mention between 2009 and 2011..Oranjblud (talk) 12:18, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Ruhama

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Removed http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Siemens&diff=490553676&oldid=490551835

This keeps cropping up on various pages - I haven't found reliable sources that confirm the allegations. It's not clear how/who/why/what was controversial if anything happened.Oranjblud (talk) 00:36, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Finance

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I also removed this http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Siemens&diff=490557585&oldid=490557468 -it may be reliable information, but is so lacking in context, or integration that it appears as little more than trivia. ie "random collection of facts" - perhaps someone else can do something with it, and add some context. (also wp:recentism)

'In September 2011, Siemens transferred more than half-a-billion Euros in cash deposits from a large French bank to the European Central Bank (ECB). In all, Siemens has deposited between 4 to 6 billion Euros ($5.4 to $8.1 billion) mainly in one-week deposits. Only prominent companies can deposit directly with the ECB.[1]

References

  1. ^ "Siemens shelters up to €6bn at ECB". September 20, 2011.

--— Preceding unsigned comment added by Oranjblud (talk • contribs) 01:10, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Stuxnet

Latest comment: 11 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Stuxnet, No mention of Stuxnet? --12.31.160.200 (talk) 15:35, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Actually that is a good point, however the Siemens page here covers the corporation rather than incidental criminal activities allegedly committed by the United States and Israel against hardware and software developed and/or fielded by Siemens. If Stuxnet were to be mentioned, that would stand out as irrelevant given the large number of worms, Trojans and viruses that target Siemens products. Likely the Microsoft Wiki page does not enumerate software attacks against their products, so mentioning Stuxnet here is probably not relevant. Damotclese (talk) 23:13, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
I'll amend my note to suggest that if Siemens ever admits culpability in cooperating with international terrorists to develop the Stuxnet worm, that would perhaps elevate the worm to the realm of being discussed on the Siemens' page. So far nobody has admitted to the crime and Siemens almost certainly did not cooperate in any way; nor would there be any need since reverse engineering and open source aspects of the control systems eliminated any Siemens involvement, in my opinion. Damotclese (talk) 23:17, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

2011 to Present -- Invensys Rail Purchase

Latest comment: 11 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

In April of 2013, Siemens purchased Invensys Rail which is a significant "life event" for the Siemens corporation inasmuch as Siemens acquired Safetran Systems Corp. From Invensys which positions Siemens Rail much more strongly in North America. It seems to be a significant-enough acquisition to mention. If nobody else adds an update in the coming days touching upon the Invensys Rail acquisition, I'll do so. Damotclese (talk) 19:18, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Actually, reviewing the article as well as the Talk page, I think I will refrain from editing the page. I don't much like delving in to long-lived corporations with questionable history so I won't apply my name to edits. Maybe someone else will take the initiative and decide whether the acquisition of rail capabilities is worth mentioning. Damotclese (talk) 23:06, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Reversed revision 04:25, 3 July 2013‎ Ich901 . . (55,843 bytes) (-77)‎ . . (unsourced crap)

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

User:ich901 removed the text The company has been the subject of considerable controversy in recent years. with the check-in comment unsourced crap. I have reverted that edit and invite discussion on what specifically is not sourced or otherwise referenced. I don't find any text covering the history of the corporation to be "unsourced" or the statement that the corporation has extensive controvery to be inaccurate. Thanks! Damotclese (talk) 15:12, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Predictions and Fortune Telling

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The newly-added section on wind turbine facility and hoped-for employee counts makes predictions about future events which is generally frowned upon in Wikipedia. For well-maintained pages that's less of a problem than for less-loved articles since failed predictions are corrected quickly. Damotclese (talk) 14:37, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Merge request

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I'm proposing a merge because the only information of Vistagy that can be reliably sourced is about Siemens purchasing it. I'd like to see us do this if possible. Thoughts? Thargor Orlando (talk) 17:12, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Safetran / Invensys acquisition

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The history sections of the extant article lack any serious details about the railroad equipment vendor Safetran which was bought by Invensys solely to improve Invensys' financial portfolio of companies in its rail division. When Siemens purchased Safetran in North America from Invensys, that acquisition gave Siemens responsibility for the Safetrans aspects of the ACSES signaling system within the Northeast Corridor and has resulted in Siemens acquiring the contract to expand ACSES-2 in to the Long Island Rail Road, all of which is pretty significant since LIRR runs the most locomotives in the country and the NEC is the busiest rail line in the country.

I don't know how to piece that information together successfully in to a brief addition to the history, however it would be good to have some mention of the very large industry share Siemens acquired by purchasing Invensys's Safetran corporation and the existing and future projects which are scheduled.

Maybe I should post a brief proposed text addition and see what people think. Does that sound reasonable? Or perhaps it's not significant enough to be included in the Siemens Corporation's Century-long history. Damotclese (talk) 15:45, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Siemens. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:49, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

^ One of the links offered works, the other does not. So we have basically at least two dead links still, the check I did failed. Damotclese (talk) 22:12, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Forced Labor

Latest comment: 8 years ago7 comments3 people in discussion

The editor who is trying to change text to an emotional "forced labor," you were reverted because you need ti talk about that proposed update here first, when it comes to using emotive language it is best to discuss it first. TrainsOnTime (talk) 22:25, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for starting this discussion. I did not consider my change to "forced labour" to be particularly controversial. Indeed, I found the previous wording of "employed some skilled labour" to be euphemistic to almost an apologist degree. We already refer to Siemens' role at Auschwitz as "forced labour" in the article Forced labour under German rule during World War II. The second perhaps controversial aspect of my edit is the use of "exploited" instead of "employed". I consider that "employed" implies an employer/employee relationship, which is inappropriate when describing forced labour. The phrase "exploited slave labour" is used in List of German Private Companies that Exploited Slave Labor from the Natzweiler-Struthof Concentration Camps. While the language may be emotive, the previous wording is inaccurate. Matt J User|Talk 10:13, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
Okay, that seems fair enough. Forced labor is suitable when it's got a reference or citation. I am totally okay with the wording to be used with a reference. I think other editors might like a citation as well. Damotclese (talk) 15:57, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
The existing citation for the passage is titled "Le travail forcé", which is exactly equivalent to "forced labour". Matt J User|Talk 08:54, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
I think your proposed change is good, I reverted it because I had not done my homework fully. It does look like "forced labor" is correct. Would you please make your change again? Thanks! Damotclese (talk) 15:47, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
I agree, your reference for forced labor should be restored. TrainsOnTime (talk) 22:26, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

  Done Thank you all, I have restored the passage. Matt J User|Talk 12:08, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Ingenuity for life -- new marketing campaign

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

FYI, that new corporate public relations marketing rhetoric "ingenuity for life" is actually real, Their Tumblr Account actually shows that it's real, it's not a hoax or idiot joke. Yes, it means nothing, but that's transnational corporate conglomerate public relations B.S. in a nut shell. I mention it in case someone looks at that and wonders if it's real or if it's a joke. Damotclese (talk) 15:45, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Graduate program

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The following is sourced only to SPS, and needs independent sourcing for us to give any WEIGHT to this - with this sourcing it is WP:UNDUE. Moved here per WP:PRESERVE for now.

The Siemens Graduate Program (The SGP)

The Siemens Graduate Program, which has existed since 1922, is the first university graduate program to be established at Siemens. It is an international two-year development program for Master Graduates and PhDs available in various global regions (for example Germany, Denmark, UK, Belgium, France, Spain, Switzerland, Russia, China, India, United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Egypt, Brazil, and USA). The SGP consists of three work assignments, one of them abroad, within one of the Siemens Divisions, each lasting eight months. The participants are working at least in two different functional areas during their rotations and are accompanied by a personal mentor for the duration of the program.[1]

References

  1. ^ "The Siemens Graduate Program". www.siemens.com. Retrieved 14 April 2014.

-- Jytdog (talk) 00:58, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Siemens. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:48, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Siemens. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:15, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Siemens endorses crackpot theories of gyroscopic levitation?

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

One of their research engineers, Horst Eckardt, writes: "A comprehensive analysis of gyroscopic motion was given in this paper [The gyroscope fully understood: Complete gyroscopic motion with external torque]. A new approach for fast moving gyroscopes was developed. The most astonishing aspect is the possibility of lifting. The local torques generate a linear momentum, therefore this is not conserved. This momentum is not a constant of motion, while the corresponding coordinate is part of the Lagrangian formulation. So there is no need for expecting such a conservation." Can this be true? If true, there should certainly be a section on this topic ("Forays into pseudoscience"). Shouldn't Siemens at least have one of their more competent physicists look into the Eckardt affair?137.205.100.80 (talk) 08:29, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Vai Ingdesi Automation (Argentina, Industrial Automation)

Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Also in 2007, Siemens acquired Vai Ingdesi Automation (Argentina, Industrial Automation), UGS Corp., Dade Behring, Sidelco (Quebec, Canada), S/D Engineers Inc., and Gesellschaft für Systemforschung und Dienstleistungen im Gesundheitswesen mbH (GSD) (Germany).[109]

May a link for Siemens' Vai Ingdesi Automation acquisition be provided?

--Leonardo T. Cardillo (talk) 17:41, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Article tags

Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi Bidgee, I see you have put numerous tags on the header of the article. Could you leave some text here outlining the nature of your issue with the article as/is? At the moment it is not clear that the problem is and which way you believe the NPOV problem goes. A look at the talk archive doesn't clarify the issue either. Thanks. Ashmoo (talk) 20:29, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Siemens in Auschwitz

Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

In most concentration camps in europe and also in the concentration camps in auschwitz are electric fences ... the kz prisoners can not escape, because the electric fence was set under high voltage ... if a kz prisoner touch the electric fence, he is instant dead ... the electric fence in most concentration camps and also the electric fence of auschwitz were set under high voltage by a electric generator ... there in europe is only 1 firm, that builds electric generators ... and that is siemens ... this is 1 point, that you must know about siemens ... the 2. point about siemens is, that siemens is, that siemens had a production monopol on trains ... all trains that were used in germany and poland, from the monarch age until today, are built by siemens ... the jews were sent to auschwitz by siemens built trains ... the 3. point about siemens is, that siemens had a factory in auschwitz, the concentration camp bobrek, a sub camp of auschwitz the 4. point about siemens is, that siemens paid hitlers political rise ... this is, what you must know about Siemens ... today siemens is one of the most powerful firms of the world — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:FA:5F0A:7700:E116:9F4F:B063:A562 (talk) 14:04, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Scandal in lead

Latest comment: 4 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I took the liberty of expanding on the scandal in the article lead.

Beginning in 2005, Siemens became embroiled in a multi-national bribery scandal.[1] One component of this scandal was the Siemens Greek bribery scandal over deals between Siemens AG and Greek government officials during the 2004 Summer Olympic Games in Athens, Greece.[2] Siemen's activities came under legal scrutiny when complaints from prosecutors in Italy, Liechtenstein and Switzerland lead to Germany authorities opening investigations, followed by a US investigation in 2006 concerning their activities while listed on US stock exchanges.[3] The investigators found that bribing officials to win contracts was standard operating procedure.[3][4] Over that time period the company paid around $1.3 billion in bribes in many countries and kept separate books to hide them.[4] Settlement negotiations took place through most of 2008 with settlement terms announced in December 2008. The company paid a total of about $1.6 billion, around $800 million in each of the US and Germany. This was the largest bribery fine in history, at the time. The company was also obligated to spend $1 billion on setting up and funding new internal compliance regimens.[3] Siemens pleaded guilty to violating accounting provisions of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act; the parent company did not plead guilty to paying bribes (although its Bangladesh and Venezuela subsidiaries did[4]).

References

  1. ^ "Bloomberg.com". 20 May 2007. Retrieved 12 January 2008.
  2. ^ "Report: Siemens Scandal May Involve Top Executives". DW. 27 November 2006.
  3. ^ a b c Cite error: The named reference NYThow was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  4. ^ a b c Cite error: The named reference WaPo2008 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

This was my rapid compression of the larger account in the article below. I tried to keep this short and lead-worthy. My opinion is that if it seems to large for the lead as it now stands, that's mostly because the rest of the lead itself is far too short for such a large enterprise, with such a long history.

Another solution (which I favour to some degree) is for the Siemen's scandal to have its own main article. It baffles me how the Greek scandal has its own page, but the larger investigation does not. If this lead had an efficient link that that lead, much of what I've added here could instead become lead text there, permitting an even shorter summary in this article, something along the lines of:

In 2008, as part of the Siemens multinational bribery scandal, Siemens pleaded guilty to violating accounting provisions of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and was fined $800 million in each of the US and Germany, and obligated to spend $1 billion on setting up and funding new internal compliance regimens.

With much of this off-loaded to the proposed main scandal article, this much shorter version would suffice here, IMO—but not until, IMNSHO. — MaxEnt 19:00, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

@MaxEnt: I don't think this much scandal info belongs in the lead, per WP:UNDUE. It looks like POV-pushing to try to publicly shame Siemens. Certainly not a paragraph more than double the size of the rest of the lead. Microsoft's antitrust challenges are far more well known, but nobody would argue that that's what they're notable for in their lead. If anything, I'd simply say something like "The company has been involved in various bribery scandals in its history, and was fined numerous times." You've already got "scandal" prominently in the TOC - why pile it on? TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 23:48, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Siemens/Archive_1&oldid=1262912452"