Talk:Tom McKillop

PAGE SOCK PUPPETS

Someone wrote a glowing review of RBS's assets, it's market value, it's share price, in the description of Tom's charimanship of the company, preferring to talk about "bank of china" aquisition prior to Tom's time at RBS, than the 71billion pound investment in AMR Aramco which caused the downfall of the bank, during Tom's tenure there. Whoever is using glowing terms to describe the bank's assets, share price, is clearly very fond of Tom and is probably Tom himself covering up for his effete chairmanship of a bank which has lost more than 58 billion pounds since the time that he arrived there.

Wikipedia should arrange that this page not be a glowing review of RBS considering that it was the center of one of the biggest banking scandas and public scrutiny of mismanagement in living memory for the UK. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lifeinthetrees (talk • contribs) 12:12, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

RBS vs. McKillop

Chairman of a bank that lost 60 billion dollars in value, the entire page fails to describe his career in any way relative to the bank, glances over his questioning by MP's as a side-note, and is an obscure defense of his reputation as a chairman of a bank that lost 60 billion dollars in value after he sought work there.

His previous company Astra Zeneca was also poorly run, and was heavily involved in lobbying and misinformation in order to maximize share price and arranged to sell dangerous products by circumventing pharmaco safety procedures.

The page has been written as a defense of an entrepreneur with an overall wealth creation record of negative 59.5 billion dollars, it is biased and motions only to his favor. It should be supervised by Wiki to avoid future covert editing and to present a clear picture of the subject.

RBS vs. McKillop

RBS section says much about the bank and almost nothing about McK. --Oakhonor (talk) 17:55, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Tom McKillop. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160413051238/http://www1.hw.ac.uk/annual-review/2006/people_awards.html to http://www1.hw.ac.uk/annual-review/2006/people_awards.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:01, 25 May 2017 (UTC)