![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
![]() | The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
conflict of interest,
autobiography, and
neutral point of view.
|
The caption on the photo reads "A "nest" of scooters on a sidewalk in San Jose, California, making the sidewalk unpassable for wheelchair users.". This doesn't sound neutral, but I think it's also just plain wrong, as the sidewalk does not appear blocked in the photo. David G ( talk) 02:37, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
The valuation of this company is a big problem. I removed the $2 billion valuation because the number was quoted as a "source." Currently, the page was edited to make the valuation of $1 billion. That number was generated by Sequoia Financial. It should be noted that both Bird and Sequoia Financial are both privately held companies with no requirement of financial disclosure. Neither company is under any legal requirement to provide justification for valuation statements. Nwyant ( talk) 17:50, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
The article is a disaster. I tried to purge the offending material, but since that got reverted, some major work is needed to clean up the article.
This is particularly relevant in light of the previous comment alleging bias + the Verge reporting that Lime had hired a PR firm to spread negative news about Bird (which is what brought me here in the first place) - https://www.theverge.com/2018/11/16/18098734/facebook-definers-public-relations-firm-apple-google-bird - which possibly explains why the Controversy section is longer than the rest of the article 68.196.108.48 ( talk) 05:35, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
This article sounds like it was written by the company. How is there no mention of birdgraveyard? 140.182.73.13 ( talk) 20:05, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page have been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reasons for deletion at the file description pages linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 04:21, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 04:51, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
the recent purchase of spin was by Bird Canada as well. Not bird.
https://betakit.com/bird-canada-takes-international-counterpart-bird-global-under-its-wing-in-merger/ 208.98.222.46 ( talk) 21:37, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
![]() | The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
conflict of interest,
autobiography, and
neutral point of view.
|
The caption on the photo reads "A "nest" of scooters on a sidewalk in San Jose, California, making the sidewalk unpassable for wheelchair users.". This doesn't sound neutral, but I think it's also just plain wrong, as the sidewalk does not appear blocked in the photo. David G ( talk) 02:37, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
The valuation of this company is a big problem. I removed the $2 billion valuation because the number was quoted as a "source." Currently, the page was edited to make the valuation of $1 billion. That number was generated by Sequoia Financial. It should be noted that both Bird and Sequoia Financial are both privately held companies with no requirement of financial disclosure. Neither company is under any legal requirement to provide justification for valuation statements. Nwyant ( talk) 17:50, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
The article is a disaster. I tried to purge the offending material, but since that got reverted, some major work is needed to clean up the article.
This is particularly relevant in light of the previous comment alleging bias + the Verge reporting that Lime had hired a PR firm to spread negative news about Bird (which is what brought me here in the first place) - https://www.theverge.com/2018/11/16/18098734/facebook-definers-public-relations-firm-apple-google-bird - which possibly explains why the Controversy section is longer than the rest of the article 68.196.108.48 ( talk) 05:35, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
This article sounds like it was written by the company. How is there no mention of birdgraveyard? 140.182.73.13 ( talk) 20:05, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page have been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reasons for deletion at the file description pages linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 04:21, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 04:51, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
the recent purchase of spin was by Bird Canada as well. Not bird.
https://betakit.com/bird-canada-takes-international-counterpart-bird-global-under-its-wing-in-merger/ 208.98.222.46 ( talk) 21:37, 21 September 2023 (UTC)