Talk:U.S. manufacturer General Motors seeks bankruptcy protection

Press release

There may or may not be a press release forthcoming at GM's press release WWW site. That might be worth looking out for. Uncle G (talk) 12:28, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Ranking

Many sources say third largest. But they appear to be basing this on figures released before the announcement. The figures in early news reports now, at the time of the announcement, appear to be slightly different, and place GM fourth in NGI's table. It would be good for Wikinews to scoop other reports on the correct ranking. Please check the actual assets figures that GM is now giving. Uncle G (talk) 12:32, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

• The NGI table was updated to list GM in fourth place a few minutes ago, I observe. Uncle G (talk)
  • Please update the article a little more, and include the address President Obama gave to the nation, including how the US taxpayers will be owning 60%, and Canada will be owning 12%, etc. Mike Halterman (talk) 16:59, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
    • You obviously didn't see that Barack Obama presents rescue plan after GM declaration of bankruptcy has been waiting as a prepared story. I've just realized, from taking notes from the press conference, that I should have prepared a Fritz Henderson story too. ☺ There's turned out to be a lot more meat in that than in what M. Obama said. So I've removed that part from this story. It warrants its own article. Uncle G (talk) 17:13, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
    • … which I'm just writing up at Fritz Henderson outlines plan for "New GM" after GM declaration of bankruptcy. Uncle G (talk) 17:19, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Washington Mutual

Washington Mutual was not a bankruptcy, it was an FDIC receivership, after which the company was acquired by JP Morgan Chase. Bankruptcy code did not come into play. Therefore, calling GM the third-largest bankruptcy is correct. --Kitch (talk) 19:46, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

• The source that I used (as cited in the article) said, and says, that it was a bankruptcy. CNN Money thinks that it was a bankruptcy, too, and also lists this GM bankruptcy in 4th place. Even the Wikipedia article, w:Washington Mutual#Bankruptcy thinks that Washington Mutual was a bankruptcy, and cites Washington Mutual's own press release about its Chapter 11 filing as its source. So I have to say: What's your source to say that it isn't? Do you have one? I've reverted your bold edit. Please now discuss. Uncle G (talk) 03:16, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Peer Review

Revision 827396 of this article has been reviewed by Calebrw (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 20:09, 1 June 2009 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: I have some reservations about the sections. Most should be longer. There is a lot of data out there in the sources that could be added. The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

Revision 827396 of this article has been reviewed by Calebrw (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 20:09, 1 June 2009 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: I have some reservations about the sections. Most should be longer. There is a lot of data out there in the sources that could be added. The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

Styling

I am not really keen on the styling of this article ... with all the sub-headers it seems more encyclopedic than news-like in style. --SVTCobra 23:59, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

• I agree. I think 'Other related bankruptcy filings' should be taken out personally. Not sure on the table for the creditors also. -Meekel (talk) 00:06, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
• I recommend expanding your idea of what a news article is. Wikinews is no stranger to third-level headings, and we have plenty of articles using them. Newspaper articles in the rest of the world are no strangers to headings in the middle of articles, too. Indeed, two of the news articles cited as sources in this very article have such headings. Look at both of the Bloomberg articles, for instance. Uncle G (talk)
  • I just looked at all three Bloomberg sources in this article and saw no such organization of information. Am I blind? --SVTCobra 02:47, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
    • Look at the McKee article, for example. See where it says things like "Cuts Already Planned", "‘Bottom-Up’ Collapse", and "Broader Market", that don't make any sense as running text? Those are the sub-headings. The fact that they are sub-headings is the reason that they don't make sense as running text. Do you now find yourself wishing that Bloomberg's style made its sub-headings a little clearer, as ours does, so that these mystery interjections made more sense? ☺

      I agree with what was said above about expanding the subsections, by the way. There's scope for it. There were, according to Seib (cited in the article), 50 creditors listed in the filing. The sources that I had only gave the top three. If anyone can find a source for the other 47, I'm sure that the creditors section would benefit from some expansion. Uncle G (talk) 03:27, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Contradiction

The article title is "U.S. manufacturer General Motors declares bankruptcy"

The content says "filed for bankruptcy and Chapter 11 protection"

These are two different states for a business to be in. Which is correct? Guinness2702 (talk) 07:41, 2 June 2009 (UTC)