Talk:Wingtech

Wingtech

Wingtech is not an SOE. There seems to be an effort to label it that way, but the SOE definition for Wiki is really clear, and Wingtech does not meet those. DavidRJD (talk) 00:17, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Multiple WP:RSes have pointed out that WingTech is partially state-owned. We follow what WP:RSes say on Wikipedia. Also, you have already declared that you are associated with Nexperia, a subsidiary of WingTech. Due to that WP:COI, you probably should not be editing these articles directly and should be following WP:COIEDIT. - Amigao (talk) 00:23, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Could you let me know what those sources are? There is an older article, but I can see nothing indicating Wingtech. I've provided the citations from sources you requested to clarify the ownership. DavidRJD (talk) 00:26, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

DavidRJD, you previously referenced The Wire China in your edit summaries, which lays out some of the state ownership of WingTech here. Also, here are a few more sources (1, 2, 3) that describe WingTech as having partial state ownership. - Amigao (talk) 00:41, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

I never referenced the Wire China. The articles you cite all have a minority ownership -- the one from 2021 says 30%, and the one from 2022 says less than 20%. I think we may be getting on the same page. Wingtech was reported to have investment from local municipalities (including the Wuxi City Government (9.74%), the Kunming City Government (5.67%), and the Yunnan Provincial Government (5.2%)), but it was not owned by or controlled by the Chinese Government (any more than I am a partial owner of Intel). How about we use the information from your sources to be accurate? DavidRJD (talk) 00:52, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

You indeed referenced The Wire China in your own edit summary here. - Amigao (talk) 00:59, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

So I take it you agree with the proposed changes? DavidRJD (talk) 01:02, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

The optimal way for a COI editor to propose changes is with Template:Edit COI. - Amigao (talk) 01:10, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

I adopted precisely the language from the article you provided. DavidRJD (talk) 04:01, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Stop editing the article directly. Any further abuse of this point (on either this article or Nexperia) and I will ask an admin to block you. Axad12 (talk) 05:23, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

I've already asked an admin to jump in. Let us get some help to resolve this. DavidRJD (talk) 05:24, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Note to handling editors: please also see similar request for Nexperia. Axad12 (talk) 02:13, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Remove State Owned

Remove: "State Owned"

Reason: Wingtech is not a state-owned Entity. Calling something a SoE in China implies it is not is designed to harm the company and is not accurate. It would be correct to say a small percentage is owned by local governments, but your label is inaccurate.

Links to support: https://fintel.io/so/cn/600745, https://simplywall.st/stocks/cn/tech/shse-600745/wingtech-technologyltd-shares/ownership, https://www.marketscreener.com/quote/stock/WINGTECH-TECHNOLOGY-CO-LT-9950161/, and all are current as of today. DavidRJD (talk) 05:39, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Relevant background to this procedurally incorrect COI edit request can be found at COIN (here [1]) and at the user's talkpage. The matter seems to be disputed by user:Amigao. Axad12 (talk) 05:43, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia Admins ask us to discuss issues here and try to resolve them. Do you have any issue with the statements above? DavidRJD (talk) 05:46, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

I take no sides on the issue, I simply note that it is disputed by another editor (who I believe has elsewhere provided sources which support their position). I also believe you have a significant COI that you refuse to disclose - which is relevant information when a user makes an edit request.

My only interest here is in fair play. Axad12 (talk) 05:52, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

I've disclosed my association with Nexperia but have no connection with Wingtech. I am not paid, in any way, by any entity for these edits. My reasons for this edit are personal, as I have seen what happens when you start placing "State-owned" or "SoE" onto entities. Words matter, and labels matter even more. DavidRJD (talk) 06:28, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

If want fair play, a company that floats on a stock exchange would not be labeled as state owned. None of the citations support the state-owned, other than showing a minority state investment (less than 20%). This is an attempt to label a competitor as something they are not. DavidRJD (talk) 03:04, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Just a note to say that I am reluctant to involve myself in this matter, having previously been involved in the discussion at WP:COIN. I hope that other editors will be able to arrive at a wording which all parties are happy with. Axad12 (talk) 03:17, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

We follow what WP:RSes state and they clearly state that there is partial state ownership of Wingtech. - Amigao (talk) 07:40, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

WP:RS show partial state investment, not ownership. Your edits point out a 20% share of ownership and ignore the 80% privately owned. Worse, your edits don't say "partial." They omit this and make it seem like a publicly traded company is owned and run by the state. This isn't intellectually accurate. Why are you attributing ownership to a small minority interest rather than the majority that is publicly traded? DavidRJD (talk) 15:36, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Just so we are all clear, the articles you cite all have a minority ownership -- the one from 2021 says 30%, and the one from 2022 says less than 20%. Wingtech was reported to have investment from local municipalities (including the Wuxi City Government (9.74%), the Kunming City Government (5.67%), and the Yunnan Provincial Government (5.2%)), but it was not owned by or controlled by the Chinese Government (any more than I am a partial owner of Intel). How about we use the information from your sources to be accurate? DavidRJD (talk) 15:39, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Just a brief note to ask if all parties already involved in this discussion would please wait for an uninvolved editor to arrive and weigh up the evidence. There is no point in you continuing to argue between yourselves.

The longer this thread becomes, the less likely anyone new is going to be prepared to read all the way through it, and thus the longer the wait will be for resolution. Axad12 (talk) 17:25, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

State owned means "State ownership, also called public ownership or government ownership, is the ownership of an industry, asset, property, or enterprise by the national government of a country or state, or a public body representing a community, as opposed to an individual or private party. " Wingtech is a publically traded company WP:RS is the WSJ, don't think it gets much more RS than that. The Wiki definition of State Owned shows that Wingtech is not a state owned entity.

State investment does not mean state owned. That is a logcal faliicy that thet the Wiki on State Owned Entprises SoE explicity notes " since governments can also own regular stock, without implying any special interference". If the argument that Amigao was making were true, I could say that Nvidia is a state-owned asset of Canada because the CPP owns a significant interest in it.

I want to add that there is no central SASAC ownership according to the WP:RS that have been cited. According to the ones cited, there is less than a 17.5% interest (total) in the entity, and the central SASAC owns none—only various local municipalities.

If this statement needs to be made, it must be in the context of the other owners. Otherwise, it gives a false and misleading impression. Saying something is state owned when it is a publically traded security is false and misleading -- particulaly when the WP:RS cited shoes that more than 88% of the interest is held by shareholders.

I think that the issue here is that state investment into a company (as pointed out by Wiki) does not mean it is state controlled or state owned. In the instant case, when the state interest is so minor, calling it state owned is disingenuous.

DavidRJD (talk) 20:38, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Please see the Nexperia article where @Amigao indicates that Wingtech is not correctly labeled as simply "State Owned". Despite this, Wingtech has been edited to make it appear as though it is a state-owned enterprise despite no ownership by the central government and only very minor investment by local municipalities.

The Wall Street Journal, Reuters, Shanghai Stock Exchange, Market Screener, all make it clear Wingtech is privately owned.(linkd to WP:RS) . Since you want to use CNBC, I'd point out that CNBC has its description of Wingtech as follows: "WINGTECH TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD, formerly JOIN-IN (HOLDING) CO.,LTD., is a China-based company principally engaged in the research, development and manufacture of mobile terminals and smart hardware products. The Company operates three business segments. The Electronic Equipment Manufacturing Business segment is mainly engaged in the research and manufacturing of mobile internet equipment products mainly based on smart phones. " You can call it a China-Based Company, but throwing a label on it as "State Owned" is materially inaccurate and has a negative effect on the company.

Instead of using a link from behind a paywall that is not WP:RS or an article from CNBC from years ago with a single unverified source (CNBC goes to great lengths to distance itself from the report for a reason), I'd prefer to rely on the current description from the WP:RS. To that end I've reviewed all the above, including the 2021 CNBC article. The CBNC says the money received was in an "investment fund." -- exactly the item Wiki says does not mean an entity is properly lableled as state-owned or operated.

The edit Amigao made to remove partial was, according to the cross-post on Nexperia, inaccurate. I will WP:AGF that this was simply confusion, and I look forward to an Admin correcting. We are in the middle of escalating tensions between the US and China. Anything we can do to create understanding on both sides to provide neutral information that de-escalates the conflict would be a good thing to do. Throwing labels as "state-owned" makes it an us vs. them issue, which reinforces division rather than understanding. My 2c. DavidRJD (talk) 18:10, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

Remove Ownerhips by the "State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission of the State Council"

Remove: "State Owned"

Reason: Wingtech is not a state-owned Entity. Calling something a SoE in China implies it is not is designed to harm the company and is not accurate. It would be correct to say a small percentage is owned by local governments, but your label is inaccurate.

Links to support:  https://fintel.io/so/cn/600745, https://simplywall.st/stocks/cn/tech/shse-600745/wingtech-technologyltd-shares/ownership, https://www.marketscreener.com/quote/stock/WINGTECH-TECHNOLOGY-CO-LT-9950161/, and all are current as of today. The entity cited entity does not own or control Wingtech. The fact that it is a publicly-traded company with reporting requirements [2] and those further show that it is not a state-owned asset. DavidRJD (talk) 05:44, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

See additional posts in the duplicate request directly above this one. Axad12 (talk) 05:59, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

To demonstrate my commitment to fair play, did you really mean to say (in the final sentence above) "it is now a state-owned asset"? I assume you meant 'not' rather than 'now'? Axad12 (talk) 06:01, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Yup, that is correct. I appreciate you pointing it out.

(Redacted)

We all have biases. I want accurate information because many rely on WIki as a primary source. DavidRJD (talk) 06:40, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

I want to add that there is no central SASAC ownership according to the WP:RS that have been cited. According to the ones cited, there is less than a 17.5% interest (total) in the entity, and the central SASAC owns none—only various local municipalities. Saying it is owned by the SASAC is factually inaccurate. If you want to say less than 18% is held by local government municipalities, that would be accurate. But the labels here matter,

This change was made in response to my change listing out the names of the entities and the actual percentages that they hold. Local municaplities that represent that less than 17.5% interest and then calling them the owner is disingenuous for the reasons above.

DavidRJD (talk) 20:46, 28 September 2024 (UTC)