Talk:PwC/Archives/2016
 | This is an archive of past discussions about PwC. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Involvement in politics controversies section
This section appears to be clearly contrary to WP:CRITS - and more specifically, WP:CORG. The article no doubt needs to be broadly rewritten to remove the 'controversies' section per WP:CRITS. This particular section appears to focus on two articles written by The Australian journalists Janet Albrechtsen (and one by Miranda Devine). I have particular concern re:
"If reliable sources – other than the critics themselves – provide substantial coverage devoted to the controversies or criticisms, then that may justify sections and sub-articles devoted to the controversies or criticism – however within the limitations of WP:BLPGROUPS."
The controversy is merely the op-ed pieces published in this one newspaper. I don't see any substantial secondary coverage of the criticisms. I do not believe this is relevant to the article as a whole. The language used appears to also breach WP:BIAS, e.g. describing events using the language of the columnists - 'suffering post-presidential election trauma' (which does not appear to be present in the source material). Wikipedia is not a place to collect any organisation/individual (WP:NOT) that is criticised by in op-ed pieces. It seems to be portraying a POV. Have reverted to the status quo, pending a consensus for inclusion. MvjsTalking 15:42, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
Software security hole issue.
Not sure if this can be added directly to the article due to the above issue, but I figured that it could be mentioned here and added later, if deemed important. Basically, there are a few news reports on PwC being involved with attempting to prevent discussion and disclosure of a security issue in one of their products. Articles: Fatal flaw found in PricewaterhouseCoopers SAP security software, Flaw in PricewaterhouseCoopers software can allow hackers to manipulate accounting results – report. Additionally, here is the details of the group that reported it, if it can be used: (ESNC-2041217) Critical Security Vulnerability in PwC ACE Software for SAP Security. --Super Goku V (talk) 05:01, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
Infos about 2016
Who can say befor the end of 2016, which are the data of income of 2016? Somebody has already written a definitiv nummre: US$35.9 billion (2016. Thats just stupid and exrem unserious! --77.56.118.154 (talk) 14:42, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
- the figure is for the year ending 30 June (as stated in the citation). By the way please read Wikipedia:No personal attacks. Dormskirk (talk) 20:56, 22 December 2016 (UTC)