A fact from Scanner Price Accuracy Code appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 16 December 2021 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It is requested that a photograph be
included in this article to
improve its quality.
Wikipedians in Canada may be able to help! The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
The result was: promoted by
Theleekycauldron (
talk) 21:29, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
Created by Mindmatrix ( talk). Self-nominated at 18:23, 28 November 2021 (UTC).
The article states that "About 92% of the 1000 annual calls received by the committee are not legitimate complaints". This is misleading: First, neither source says claims were not legitimate (which suggests claimants were acting fraudulently) they say claims were not valid, suggesting either that claims don’t meet the criteria set down by the agency (ie they haven’t approached the company first, or that the company isn’t part of the agreement) or that they are from 'dissatisfied customers' taking the opportunity 'to air their shopping-based grievances through an industry committee'. Second, the purpose of the quoting the statistic, which is less than those received previously, is to emphasize that people don’t know about the scheme, not that they are doing something wrong.
It needs fixing; but as it has now found itself on the main page as a Did You Know item, I feel we are stuck with the wording until that is resolved. Thoughts?
Swanny18 (
talk) 10:54, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
A fact from Scanner Price Accuracy Code appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 16 December 2021 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It is requested that a photograph be
included in this article to
improve its quality.
Wikipedians in Canada may be able to help! The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
The result was: promoted by
Theleekycauldron (
talk) 21:29, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
Created by Mindmatrix ( talk). Self-nominated at 18:23, 28 November 2021 (UTC).
The article states that "About 92% of the 1000 annual calls received by the committee are not legitimate complaints". This is misleading: First, neither source says claims were not legitimate (which suggests claimants were acting fraudulently) they say claims were not valid, suggesting either that claims don’t meet the criteria set down by the agency (ie they haven’t approached the company first, or that the company isn’t part of the agreement) or that they are from 'dissatisfied customers' taking the opportunity 'to air their shopping-based grievances through an industry committee'. Second, the purpose of the quoting the statistic, which is less than those received previously, is to emphasize that people don’t know about the scheme, not that they are doing something wrong.
It needs fixing; but as it has now found itself on the main page as a Did You Know item, I feel we are stuck with the wording until that is resolved. Thoughts?
Swanny18 (
talk) 10:54, 16 December 2021 (UTC)