This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Citigroup article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite Assume good faith Avoid personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability
Archives: 1

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

WikiProject Finance (Rated B-Class) FinanceWikipedia:WikiProject FinanceTemplate:WikiProject FinanceFinance articles Business and economics portal v • d • e This article is within the scope of WikiProject Finance, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Finance 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.  B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.  ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Companies (Rated B-Class, Top-importance) CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject CompaniesCompanies articles Companies portal v • d • e 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.  B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.  Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Business (Rated B-Class, High-priority) BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles Business and economics portal v • d • e This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Business 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.  B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.  High  This article has been rated as High-priority on the project's priority scale. WikiProject New York (Rated B-Class, Mid-importance) New YorkWikipedia:WikiProject New YorkTemplate:WikiProject New YorkNew York articles New York portal v • d • e This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of New York 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.  B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.  Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject New York City (Rated B-Class, Mid-importance) New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:Project New York CityNew York City articles New York City portal v • d • e This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related articles 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.  B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.  Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This page has been cited as a source by a media organization. The citation is in: Chuck Slothower (April 22, 2005). "No tact in the Citi". Oregon Daily Emerald. http://www.dailyemerald.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2005/04/22/4268e269c200f.  (details)

Citigroup received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived.  It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

Archives
June 2004 → September 2007

Contents 1 Removing promotional material 2 April 7, 1998 3 Question: Where is the Y ? 3.1 This is closer to the truth about the "Y" 4 Z or S for organization 5 Business issues 6 Citicorp Overseas Software Ltd 7 Size of the company 8 Assets 9 Recent Acquisitions 10 Contributions to Global Warming 11 citigroup logo on this posting 12 Cardholder rate increases 13 Bankruptcy

[edit] Removing promotional material

The following sentence has been snuck into the lead paragraph:
"In 2008, Citigroup was crowned Deal of the Year - Debt Market Deal of the Year at the 2008 ALB SE Asia Law Awards, and Deal of the Year - Equity Market Deal of the Year at the 2008 ALB China Law Awards[10]."
Sourced to: "www.legalbusinessonline.com.au" (very dubious as it's a blogsite hosted by an Australian SEO Search engine optimization company.)

Accolades and Awards (if not fictious) should be placed in a seperate section if relevant.

Looks like Km206 has been quite a busy boy spamming that SEO hosted blogsite.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Km2065
He's added it to hundreds of other articles now. 121.44.25.129 (talk) 03:37, 28 March 2009 (UTC)FredK

[edit] April 7, 1998

Citigroup... was formed from one of the world's largest mergers in history by combining the banking giant Citicorp and financial conglomerate Travelers Group on April 7, 1998

Sounds incorrect: Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, passed in 1999, allowed the merger to occur... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.196.53.121 (talk) 14:41, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Question: Where is the Y ?

The Bank was originally the "National City Bank of New York", as seen in the articly. This can be neatly shortened to "Citybank". But it was shortened to "Citibank". Does anyone have an explanaition for that ? I'm puzzled. This is what they have to say:

"1976 - The First National City Corporation holding company changes its name to Citicorp to better suit its global businesses."

Source: Citigroup Website

I suppose they refer to the shortening of the name and dropping of "national" as better suiting, as i can not conceive how the y>i-change should make any change in citicorps global businesses. I would greatly appreciate an answer. Thank you in advance.--83.189.43.162 23:14, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

also interested.-- ExpImp^talkcon 12:38, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

The Y is at www.citybank.com a bank founded in 1974 two years before Citcorp renamed it's bank.

i think it's just an aesthetic choice, and that it's also to give it more of a proper name than "city bank". this way it's not the group/bank of a city, but rather just citibank as a whole name.24.232.74.200 (talk) 04:44, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] This is closer to the truth about the "Y"

Just MHO, but it has seemed since the Vietnam War that American companies wishing to expand around the world will often drop the English (or rather the American) spelling of their names. This is done, I believe, in the hopes of doing business with the large anti-American segment of European society while still leaving the name sounding phonetically correct to Americans. They pay large salaries to people with Phd's to work out the psychology of this stuff. It's really sad. Do I have proof? No, they wouldn't dare admit it. After all, us war-mongering Americans wouldn't like our largest financial institution trying to distance itself from us. It's just the opinion of someone who has watched America closely since the early 1950s.75.164.145.249 (talk) 15:16, 15 January 2008 (UTC)dwargo

[edit] Z or S for organization

Organization is spelled with a Z, not an S. This is an American corporation we're talking about, and so it's completely appropriate to write with American spellings.

I hope the ghost of Noah Webster haunts any American who changes the spelling to "organisation." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chartreuse 1986 (talk • contribs) 17:27, 1 June 2007

How is this an "American" organization? It used to be, but when the single largest shareholder (between 60 and 70 percent) is Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal of Saudi Arabia, it makes it a Saudi Organisation! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.88.126.119 (talk) 03:21, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

It has been a long time since this has been an "American" company. It may have it's headquarters in NY, but that doesn't make it an "American" company.75.164.145.249 (talk) 15:21, 15 January 2008 (UTC)dwargo

It's an American company because it was formed in America, as well as it's headquarters is located in the US. Oh and "single largest shareholder (between 60 and 70 percent) is Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal of Saudi Arabia" isn't true. Quit pulling garbage out of your ass. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.184.83.213 (talk) 15:06, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Business issues

For the criticisms section, it seems like its getting very long. Could we fork the section to "Business Issues at Citigroup"? Mbisanz (talk) 22:14, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to delete most of this section, until reliable sources are provided. Much of it is original research, and the parts that aren't lack any sort of references. All controversial content must provide reliable sources per Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and a criticisms section is very controversial by nature. In addition, it has been tagged as "Unreferenced" since August 2006.
--JKeene (talk) 00:28, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Citicorp Overseas Software Ltd

COSL merged with OrbiTech. Then OrbiTech changed to Polaris. The shareholders' document shows 22% share owned by Citicorp, 20% share owned by OrbiTech A/c Citicorp. Polaris 99.225.137.120 (talk) 07:46, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Size of the company

From the opening paragraph: "According to Forbes Global 2000 in March 2007, it was the largest company in the world" - yes, but this year it didn't make the top 20. If this source is to be used, it should be the most recent data. Thought it was better to remove it altogether. Wilston (talk) 05:22, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, definitely better to pull it from the opening paragraph if it's no longer the case. A full explanation of this is a bit too much for a lead section, and should be saved for later in the article. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 08:07, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Assets

It says that the assets are 2.91 trillion, yet there is no link to that number being cited. Where is that number coming from? 67.184.83.213 (talk) 15:10, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

See the footnotes to the infobox. I believe it comes from their SEC filings as quoted on Google Finance. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 20:25, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Recent Acquisitions

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_of_America#History_since_1998, that lists recent acquisitions by Bank of America.

Have the recent acquisitions by Citigroup been listed here? I thought they have made a couple of more major acquisitions recently. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.49.11.239 (talk) 07:29, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Contributions to Global Warming

I'm new to the whole wiki code thing and I was very upset when I learned there was nothing in the criticisms section about Citigroup's current investment with coal mining and destroying the appalachians. I added some information about it from RAM.org and boston.com and was trying to get the reference thingermebobs working when it was removed. Why was it removed? Could anyone help me amend this apparent lack of important information? Here is what was edited out, part of it was at the top to warn people about their actions and I was in the process of creating a criticisms section.

"Currently Citigroup along with Bank of America is funding the contruction of 150 new coal plants in the United States supplied by coal from mountain-mining the appalachians, effectively adding 100 million cars worth of air pollution within a year along with toxic mercury contamination. All ready about 500 appalachian mountains have been decapitated."

http://ran.org/fileadmin/materials/global_finance/publications/Banks_Climate_Change_and_US_Coal_Rush.pdf http://ran.org/campaigns/global_finance/spotlight/coal_is_over_fund_the_future/ http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2007/01/16/banks_are_urged_not_to_finance_coal_power/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by SgtSwashy (talk • contribs) 01:04, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Or you guys can let companies do whatever they want on wikipedia cause they're rich, thats cool too. Damage control guys. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SgtSwashy (talk • contribs) 00:39, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

I would have to suggest that you read the help section before starting to smear the site with global warming talk. Wikipedia articles don't exist to criticize anyone. It's not going to benefit Wikipedia by posting biased information from websites with an absolute agenda that are against the topic in question. Woods01 (talk) 09:39, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] citigroup logo on this posting

The logo that is currently posted on this page is no longer the Citigroup logo. The "red" umbrella was sold back to Travelers, the new logo is simply a red arch. 66.77.129.3 (talk) 17:07, 26 November 2008 (UTC)lynne Barnard 11/26/200866.77.129.3 (talk)

Need to reiterate that the logo shown on this page is no longer accurate for Citigroup. This needs to be changed to the correct logo which can be seen at http://www.citigroup.com/ Buddhahat (talk) 19:39, 4 March 2009 (UTC)Jerry Blanton 03/04/09

That is definitely true. Could you change the logo or ask another user to do it? 67.171.172.44 (talk) 02:43, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't now how to change the logo, but if you could show me how or give me a link to somewhere in Wikipedia that shows you how to do it, I could change it. 67.171.172.44 (talk) 00:27, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Cardholder rate increases

I think a good addition should be about the Jan 31st rate increase for all it's card holders (they claim 20% of holders only, but find a holder not jacked by them) some people are seeing 400% or more increase and finance charges, back calculated by 3 months.

Even better there is video of the CEO before congress saying " We will not voluntarily increase the rates or fees on the account until the card expires ... the only reason we would consider increasing the rates or fees before the card expires would be if a cardholder pays Citi late, exceeds the credit limit, or pays with a check that bounces."

76.181.173.128 (talk) 12:09, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

I am a cardholder (two cards actually) and my rates have not increased so I suggest that the "find a cardholder not jacked by them" challenge has been met. Docdave (talk) 02:20, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Bankruptcy

They just declared bankruptcy. Has this already been added to the article, and I just missed it? 98.89.19.39 (talk) 05:02, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

CIT Group declared bankruptcy, not Citigroup. Unless they also declared bankruptcy, but I haven't seen any news of that today. Someguy1221 (talk) 05:06, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps someone could add a "Not to be confused with CIT group, another large financial services company." similar to the "Not to be confused with Citigroup, another large financial services company" on the CIT group page? I've seen dozens of confusions today. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.219.154.229 (talk) 18:49, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

I added it. Someguy1221 (talk) 19:01, 2 November 2009 (UTC)