 | This page is an archive of past discussions. 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. |
Incorrect information in the 'indices' section of MSCI's wiki page
Hi,
There is incorrect information included in the 'indices' section. Please see below for the full explanation and requested changes:
Wikipedia: In 2018 MSCI announced it would begin including mainland Chinese "A" shares in its Emerging Markets Index.
MSCI response: Correct (no change)
Wikipedia: Initially the domestic Chinese companies received a 5% weighting in the index even though the stated methodology called for a 40% weighting.[17]
MSCI response: incorrect
Initially, MSCI started to partially include China A Shares in the MSCI Emerging Markets Index on May 31, 2018, with a weight of 5%. [1]
MSCI announced in February 2019, it would increase the weight of China A shares in the MSCI Indexes by increasing the inclusion factor from 5% to 20% in three phases throughout 2019. [2]
Wikipedia: While MSCI is the last major index provider to include the companies, the decision has proved controversial, sparking criticism and questions from Senator Marco Rubio
MSCI response: to amend, “Senator Marco Rubio in June 2019, sought information from MSCI on why certain Chinese stocks had been included in the company’s indexes. [3]
Rationale: Senator Rubio’s decision to query MSCI over inclusion of China A shares in its benchmarks was not directly linked to the phased increase of the weighting of China A Shares. Senator Rubio sought information on why MSCI had included certain Chinese stocks in its widely tracked emerging market index [4]
Wikipedia: In February 2019, the Wall Street Journal reported the decision was the result of pressure from the Chinese government.[21]
MSCI response: TO add to article - MSCI has publicly refuted the claims made by the Wall Street Journal, with Henry Fernandez, Chairman and CEO of MSCI, stating there was, ‘zero politics,’ involved in the decision to include China A shares in the MSCI indexes. [5]
Wikipedia: In March 2019, CNBC reported that MSCI would quadruple the weightings of mainland Chinese shares in its global benchmarks.[22][23]
MSCI response: Correct (no change)
Thanks
Sanna Shah — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sanna Shah ( talk • contribs) 15:11, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
References
- ^ https://www.msci.com/msci-china-a-inclusion
- ^ https://www.ft.com/content/a4251986-3bc5-11e9-b856-5404d3811663 and https://www.msci.com/documents/10199/238444/China_A_Further_Weight_Increase_PR_Eng.pdf/43f3ee8b-5182-68d4-a758-2968b4206e54
- ^ Reuters, [U.S. senator queries MSCI over inclusion of Chinese shares in major benchmark - https://www.reuters.com/article/msci-indexes-rubio/u-s-senator-queries-msci-over-inclusion-of-chinese-shares-in-major-benchmark-idUSL4N23K3LW ]
- ^ Reuters, U.S. senator queries MSCI over inclusion of Chinese shares in major benchmark - https://www.reuters.com/article/msci-indexes-rubio/u-s-senator-queries-msci-over-inclusion-of-chinese-shares-in-major-benchmark-idUSL4N23K3LW
- ^ https://www.ft.com/content/bbe7b2c2-45ca-11e9-b168-96a37d002cd3
- Most issues related to inaccuracy have now been addressed, with WP:NPOV and WP:NOTCENSORED taken into account. Normchou 💬 16:08, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
EM index includes chinese companies - Controversy?
1. FTSE, Dow Jones, Bloomberg, Solactive all have indices including chinese stocks. do they also under pressure from the chinese government? 2. The argument Chinese Government pressured MSCI to include stocks in their index is not sourced. There is only originally WSJ questioning it without even a reliable source. 3. How is including chinese companies so relevant to msci, that a paragraph in the lead is necessary? -- WWbread ( Open Your Mouth?) 20:49, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
- 1. If there are reliable sources saying so, then yes, such a view should presumably be included in corresponding articles. 2. This is sourced and elaborated in the main text, and the lead is a summary of it. 3. We should simply follow
MOS:LEAD and
WP:CREATELEAD to create a NPOV lead.
Normchou
💬
21:09, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
- 1+2. Again. there is only a WSJ assumption on the reason that MSCI including China. WSJ mentioned there is no evidence or source but just "according to people familiar with the matter" to push away the responsibility and verifiability of the report. Strangely WSJ didn't assume the other stock index companies include them under pressure. 3. There is no need to include it in the lead because it doesn't reflect the correct importance of this action to the image of whole MSCI. It should be removed from the lead totally, and the "inclusion action" should be written more specifically. --
WWbread (
Open Your Mouth?)
07:56, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
- Hello. I trimmed the WP:OR/ WP:SYNTH and WP:EDITORIAL content you added. Please WP:DISCLOSE if you are subject to WP:COI editing. Normchou 💬 17:11, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
- 1+2. Again. there is only a WSJ assumption on the reason that MSCI including China. WSJ mentioned there is no evidence or source but just "according to people familiar with the matter" to push away the responsibility and verifiability of the report. Strangely WSJ didn't assume the other stock index companies include them under pressure. 3. There is no need to include it in the lead because it doesn't reflect the correct importance of this action to the image of whole MSCI. It should be removed from the lead totally, and the "inclusion action" should be written more specifically. --
WWbread (
Open Your Mouth?)
07:56, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
| This page is an archive of past discussions. 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. |
Incorrect information in the 'indices' section of MSCI's wiki page
Hi,
There is incorrect information included in the 'indices' section. Please see below for the full explanation and requested changes:
Wikipedia: In 2018 MSCI announced it would begin including mainland Chinese "A" shares in its Emerging Markets Index.
MSCI response: Correct (no change)
Wikipedia: Initially the domestic Chinese companies received a 5% weighting in the index even though the stated methodology called for a 40% weighting.[17]
MSCI response: incorrect
Initially, MSCI started to partially include China A Shares in the MSCI Emerging Markets Index on May 31, 2018, with a weight of 5%. [1]
MSCI announced in February 2019, it would increase the weight of China A shares in the MSCI Indexes by increasing the inclusion factor from 5% to 20% in three phases throughout 2019. [2]
Wikipedia: While MSCI is the last major index provider to include the companies, the decision has proved controversial, sparking criticism and questions from Senator Marco Rubio
MSCI response: to amend, “Senator Marco Rubio in June 2019, sought information from MSCI on why certain Chinese stocks had been included in the company’s indexes. [3]
Rationale: Senator Rubio’s decision to query MSCI over inclusion of China A shares in its benchmarks was not directly linked to the phased increase of the weighting of China A Shares. Senator Rubio sought information on why MSCI had included certain Chinese stocks in its widely tracked emerging market index [4]
Wikipedia: In February 2019, the Wall Street Journal reported the decision was the result of pressure from the Chinese government.[21]
MSCI response: TO add to article - MSCI has publicly refuted the claims made by the Wall Street Journal, with Henry Fernandez, Chairman and CEO of MSCI, stating there was, ‘zero politics,’ involved in the decision to include China A shares in the MSCI indexes. [5]
Wikipedia: In March 2019, CNBC reported that MSCI would quadruple the weightings of mainland Chinese shares in its global benchmarks.[22][23]
MSCI response: Correct (no change)
Thanks
Sanna Shah — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sanna Shah ( talk • contribs) 15:11, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
References
- ^ https://www.msci.com/msci-china-a-inclusion
- ^ https://www.ft.com/content/a4251986-3bc5-11e9-b856-5404d3811663 and https://www.msci.com/documents/10199/238444/China_A_Further_Weight_Increase_PR_Eng.pdf/43f3ee8b-5182-68d4-a758-2968b4206e54
- ^ Reuters, [U.S. senator queries MSCI over inclusion of Chinese shares in major benchmark - https://www.reuters.com/article/msci-indexes-rubio/u-s-senator-queries-msci-over-inclusion-of-chinese-shares-in-major-benchmark-idUSL4N23K3LW ]
- ^ Reuters, U.S. senator queries MSCI over inclusion of Chinese shares in major benchmark - https://www.reuters.com/article/msci-indexes-rubio/u-s-senator-queries-msci-over-inclusion-of-chinese-shares-in-major-benchmark-idUSL4N23K3LW
- ^ https://www.ft.com/content/bbe7b2c2-45ca-11e9-b168-96a37d002cd3
- Most issues related to inaccuracy have now been addressed, with WP:NPOV and WP:NOTCENSORED taken into account. Normchou 💬 16:08, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
EM index includes chinese companies - Controversy?
1. FTSE, Dow Jones, Bloomberg, Solactive all have indices including chinese stocks. do they also under pressure from the chinese government? 2. The argument Chinese Government pressured MSCI to include stocks in their index is not sourced. There is only originally WSJ questioning it without even a reliable source. 3. How is including chinese companies so relevant to msci, that a paragraph in the lead is necessary? -- WWbread ( Open Your Mouth?) 20:49, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
- 1. If there are reliable sources saying so, then yes, such a view should presumably be included in corresponding articles. 2. This is sourced and elaborated in the main text, and the lead is a summary of it. 3. We should simply follow
MOS:LEAD and
WP:CREATELEAD to create a NPOV lead.
Normchou
💬
21:09, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
- 1+2. Again. there is only a WSJ assumption on the reason that MSCI including China. WSJ mentioned there is no evidence or source but just "according to people familiar with the matter" to push away the responsibility and verifiability of the report. Strangely WSJ didn't assume the other stock index companies include them under pressure. 3. There is no need to include it in the lead because it doesn't reflect the correct importance of this action to the image of whole MSCI. It should be removed from the lead totally, and the "inclusion action" should be written more specifically. --
WWbread (
Open Your Mouth?)
07:56, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
- Hello. I trimmed the WP:OR/ WP:SYNTH and WP:EDITORIAL content you added. Please WP:DISCLOSE if you are subject to WP:COI editing. Normchou 💬 17:11, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
- 1+2. Again. there is only a WSJ assumption on the reason that MSCI including China. WSJ mentioned there is no evidence or source but just "according to people familiar with the matter" to push away the responsibility and verifiability of the report. Strangely WSJ didn't assume the other stock index companies include them under pressure. 3. There is no need to include it in the lead because it doesn't reflect the correct importance of this action to the image of whole MSCI. It should be removed from the lead totally, and the "inclusion action" should be written more specifically. --
WWbread (
Open Your Mouth?)
07:56, 7 July 2021 (UTC)