Talk:FazWaz

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Companies Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles

Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

Thailand

	Thailand portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Thailand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Thailand-related articles on Wikipedia. The WikiProject is also a part of the Counteracting systematic bias group aiming to provide a wider and more detailed coverage on countries and areas of the encyclopedia which are notably less developed than the rest. If you would like to help improve this and other Thailand-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.ThailandWikipedia:WikiProject ThailandTemplate:WikiProject ThailandThailand articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

@Jai49: Thank you for your assistance in reviewing this article. The removal of extraneous external links is an agreeable edit and my mistake as I was only attempting to be thorough. However, I'm not sure what particular sentences or phrasings you find problematic, in terms of Neutral Point of View, Opinion and Puffery; I did attempt to write neutrally and believe every statement is sufficiently represented with significant coverage in the multiple independent, reliable secondary-sourced news article links provided. Can we discuss these points further? I would like to keep my articles and edits in good standing with the greater community. Thank you. Pauliepg (talk) 20:20, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you may discuss to improve your article. Jai49 (talk) 06:34, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Great: I'm not sure what particular sentences or phrasings you find problematic, in terms of Neutral Point of View, Opinion and Puffery; I did attempt to write neutrally and believe every statement is sufficiently represented with significant coverage in the multiple independent, reliable secondary-sourced news article links provided. In addition, another user has since edited with comment "A bit better? Advertisement + irrelevant content removed". I was hoping you might be able to help me understand what specific phrasings in the article you continue to find issue with? Pauliepg (talk) 14:54, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]