Talk:Chubb Limited

ChrisRuvolo reverting edits

I have submitted a request to Chubb asking for permission to use information in their press releases and website to begin building this article. My first attempt was completely reverted. I will be posting the results of the discussion here and if granted permission, will begin building the article again. Solarisworld 14:38, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

   Since when would you need permission for such a thing??  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.126.18.122 (talk) 07:51, 5 November 2009 (UTC) 

Merge from ACE Limited to Chubb Limited

I propose merging ACE Limited into Chubb Limited (this article) and updating the information. The acquisition of Chubb Corporation by ACE Limited and the renaming of the company into Chubb Limited was finalized in January 2016. --Boson (talk) 14:00, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

@Boson:, I agree with your proposal for a merger. I am going to make an edit accordingly in ACE Limited rather than the child company Chubb as that article has more information already in it. How should we go about contacting an admin? Ferociouslettuce (talk) 22:01, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

As I understand it, the parent company is now called "Chubb Limited", and ACE Limited no longer exists. If we merge all the content from ACE Limited to here and change ACE Limited to a redirect, we shouldn't need an admin, though we would need appropriate edit summaries and templates to maintain attribution. --Boson (talk) 22:29, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

  Y Merger complete. Klbrain (talk) 20:58, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Merge from ACE Limited to Chubb Limited

The two pages (ACE Limited and Chubb Limited) should be merged. However, contrary to the two posts above, the Chubb page should be merged into the ACE Limited Page, which should be renamed Chubb. Is there a way to do this? Here is the rationale: ACE Limited acquired The Chubb Corporation in January 2016 and renamed the company Chubb Limited. So the surviving corporate entity is ACE, not Chubb. Using the existing Chubb Limited page, which is really a history of the acquired company, is not an accurate depiction of the facts or corporate history. In any case, I think some rewriting and finessing of the content is required here, not simply folding one company's content into the page of the other. Plutarch1964 (talk) 17:11, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

You wrote "ACE Limited acquired The Chubb Corporation in January 2016 and renamed the company Chubb Limited." [my emphasis] As I understand it (and you do, too, I think), it was ACE that was renamed to Chubb Limited, so I would prefer to say "ACE adopted the name 'Chubb Limited'", since the company is a bit ambiguous. It may be a bit difficult to express this in the final article, and I'm not sure about the name of the final article. Normally, we would omit the "Limited", but the Chubb website has

• "In January 2016, ACE Limited acquired The Chubb Corporation and adopted the renowned Chubb name globally. ... Chubb Limited, the parent company of Chubb, is listed on the New York Stock Exchange ...", which implies that in their usage Chubb by itself refers to the subsidiary (as well as the brand) and Chubb Limited refers to the parent (i.e. the former ACE).

Just using the name Chubb as the article title might add to the confusion. There are also other uses of Chubb, such as the UK brand, which appears to be completely separate. Whatever we do, I don't think the merge itself is controversial. It is more a question of how we want the history of the articles to reflect the history of the companies and how to preserve the article histories. I agree that, content-wise, we should take the ACE article as the main basis. The history section will need some care, since it is the history of at least two companies. It's a bit like talking about the source of a river with major tributaries. --Boson (talk) 10:50, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

  Y Merger complete. Klbrain (talk) 20:59, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Logo

The logo currently displayed (teal background) is not the version that is used on their homepage (e.g. here and here). It uses the black logo. And that is the version that Chubb hosts in its digital assets page to download their logo.

Their investor relations page is no different. Their press releases uses the black logo (e.g. most recent ones here and here)

Grmike is convinced that the logo they uploaded in 2016 with the teal background should be the official one used here. It would be good to have a consensus on which logo should be displayed here. Ptrnext (talk) 19:46, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Federal Insurance Company

Always annoying when there's a redirect but no section, relevant discussions, links; zero relevant content until bond money Doug Grinbergs (talk) 22:30, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Bonds for proven sexual abuser.

chubb notably posted a bond for proven rapist Donald Trump. 2605:8D80:6A2:4F30:7B16:A6EE:63D9:88C5 (talk) 14:13, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Could you perhaps link a source to this and properly integrate it into the article, instead of slapping it at the end of a paragraph with nothing to back up this claim? Synorem (talk) 14:14, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

https://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2024/03/08/764218.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:8D80:6A2:4F30:7B16:A6EE:63D9:88C5 (talk) 14:19, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

This doesn't say anything about him being found guilty of rape. This just states that he was given bonds by Chubb to appeal a defamation case. Synorem (talk) 14:23, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

https://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2024/03/08/764218.htm 2607:9880:2B00:76:6F2:7E81:592A:4E7F (talk) 14:47, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

https://apnews.com/article/trump-rape-carroll-trial-fe68259a4b98bb3947d42af9ec83d7db#:~:text=NEW%20YORK%20(AP)%20%E2%80%94%20A,to%20regain%20the%20White%20House 2607:9880:2B00:76:6F2:7E81:592A:4E7F (talk) 14:58, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Bonds for proven sexual abuser.

https://apnews.com/article/trump-rape-carroll-trial-fe68259a4b98bb3947d42af9ec83d7db#:~:text=NEW%20YORK%20(AP)%20%E2%80%94%20A,to%20regain%20the%20White%20House. 2607:9880:2B00:76:6F2:7E81:592A:4E7F (talk) 14:46, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

https://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2024/03/08/764218.htm 2607:9880:2B00:76:6F2:7E81:592A:4E7F (talk) 14:46, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Trump is a known rapist

The jury found that Mr. Trump was guilty of rape on 5/9/2023. Attached is the article with the pdf of the actual completed Jury Form. [1] Truthshooter40 (talk) 16:04, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

The jury found that he “sexually abused” Carroll, and a judge in a related defamation case acknowledged that the terms “rape” and “sexual abuse,” while not the same criminal charge in New York, are both colloquially known as “rape.” 2600:1010:B19B:BB7:6923:3FD9:9E8:7D29 (talk) 18:28, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Donald is a proven sexual abuser, better hide your wife's and daughters. His tag line is greb em by the pussy. 2607:9880:2B00:76:8D0E:D201:3176:7004 (talk) 12:18, 14 March 2024 (UTC)