Talk:Schindler Group

Erasure of Accident paragraph

I have deleted the whole paragraph about accidents because in my view it violates Wikipedia's priciple of neutrality. Elevators and escalators are the safest means of transport. Although extremly rarely, accidents happen from time to time. All manufacturers and service companies are affected. And there is absolutely no proof that the equiment of one manufacturer has more incidents than others. Moreover, all manufacturers have to comply with the safty prescriptions. So, to link Schindler so prominently to accidents is not fair, incorrect and biased. If ever, as a consequence, such a paragraph must be added to all manufacturers. Moreover, there is a Wikipedia page on elevator accidents. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Loris-42 (talk • contribs) 16:50, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

I deleted the Accident paragraph once again. The reasons for it I already mentioned below (see entry of August 2008). Here just one additional fact; according to the statistics of the Japanese Ministry of Infrastructure and Transport (MLIT) on average 10 fatal elevator accidents happened in Japan in the years 2005, 2006 and 2007. None of these 30 fatal accidents was related to Schindler except this unfortunate one in Minato. And even the Police confirmed earlier this year that the Minato accident was caused by poor maintenance and that the design of the Schindler elevator was ok. By the way: it was not Schindler who had the maintenance contract. It was a Japanese service company not related to Schindler. It is always easy to blame a foreign company to distract from accidents that happened in equipment of the own industry. So, one more, I state that it is not fair, incorrect and biased to place this paragraph in a company portrait. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Loris-42 (talk • contribs) 16:56, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

This is not the place you bring your own numbers and argue the statistics. In addition, I can bring you other statistics. In city of Hiroshima, they checked all the existing elevators in the city to find 35 problematic lifts out of total 457 (7.7%). Among those, Schindler had 14 problematic ones out of 41 (34.1%) - the information you have already deleted.

Your story on maintenance company is partly incorrect. Allegedly, Schindler did not pass properly the maintenance information when they handed the contract to another company.

Your figure of "Schindler was blamed because it was a foreign company" is a very easy picture. But the fact is that Schindler was criticized for several specific reasons.

1) Schindler refused to submit the list of all the existing elevators to the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism(MLIT) only to be subsequently criticized on June 9 2006 by MLIT Minister Kazuo Kitagawa and also by the japanese media.

2) Schindler initially refused to make any official comment, stating that the accident happened because of "passenger's dangerous mishandling".

3) Schindler suddenly canceled press meeting. They refused to attend the meeting with the Minato Ward.

I have added the link to Minato Ward 2006 elevator accident--217.235.27.185 (talk) 20:49, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm working in the elevator industry and I realized that lists of accidents can't be found in articles about other big elevator brands here on Wikipedia. To me this looks not neutral. Further, I don't see the relevance of such a list for the article, especially, when there are dedicated Wikipedia pages that are actually dealing with elevator accidents. Therefore, I propose to delete the entire accidents section again and will proceed if no one oposes within the next 7 days. Thanks ElevatorABC (talk) 15:15, 8 June 2020 (UTC) Since noone oposed agains my proposal from June 2020, I'll proceed and delete the entire accidents section accordingly.ElevatorABC (talk) 13:03, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Citations Needed

Two Japanese users have added statements about alleged problems with Schindler's elevators but have done so without providing citations to support their claims.

Otis a japanese company?

since when is Otis a "japanese elevator manufacturer"? 81.221.102.34 00:09, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Elevator Saftey

"Elevators are extremely safe. Their safety record with extremely low rate of incident, is unsurpassed by any other transport system. This is true for installations of all major elevator manufacturers. In most countries elevators have to comply with strict safety regulations. However, fatalities – mainly due to unsafe behavior of passengers or in very rare cases due to malfunctions – have occurred on occasion."

How's this relevant to this article? It belongs in the article for elevators alone, not that for a manufacturer of them. I'll remove in one week if no objections. TheIslander 22:54, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

It's been more than a week now, and someone's actually added a npov tag, so I've gone ahead and removed it. TheIslander 18:17, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Safety In Japan

The Japanese Safety section is not only poorly written and without sources, but is also totally irrelevant. The article states that Schindler was not on contract to service the unit, but Japan Power/SCE was. Therefore Schindler has little if any relation to the accident. In the elevator industry, a manufacturer such as Schindler, designs, builds, and installs elevators. In addition, Schindler and all the major manufacturers offer service, but the property owner can choose any service company to maintain the elevator. It is then the responsibility of the contracted service provider that the elevator is in safe working condition.

The article then goes on to state that a small number Schindler Elevators entrapped passengers in Japan. Entrapments occur on a daily basis and are not life threatening to passengers. Elevators of any manufacturer and vintage-- like any mechanical equipment-- are prone to occasional failure due to power outages, equipment failure, etc. Mentioning this in an encyclopedia article about Schindler would be akin to mentioning in an article about Honda that some of its vehicles may fail to start on occasion or make "strange noises".

I propose that the entire section be deleted. (75.50.108.64 04:46, 29 September 2007 (UTC))

I've removed the whole section as recentist fluff. Graham87 13:23, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Miconic 10

The paragraph on the Miconic 10 controls read as if it were an ad for the product. I have cleaned it up to make it sound unbiased and added a source for the material. (75.50.108.64 06:23, 4 October 2007 (UTC))

Moved down the page below history, as 2nd paragraph is effectively part of the lead, and looks too ad. like. Added links to some other major manufacturers for balance as well. - BulldozerD11 (talk) 12:42, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Logo-schindler.gif

Image:Logo-schindler.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 13:08, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

“Knizia Strelow”

What is “Knizia Strelow”? --84.61.186.139 (talk) 09:52, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

As the article says, a subsidiary company, although we could use a source for that. --McGeddon (talk) 15:23, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Although this reference desk thread suggests that they were actually two separate companies; Knizia and Strelow. --McGeddon (talk) 15:23, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Accident and controversy in Japan

Who has removed this section without giving any notice? --79.244.9.32 (talk) 19:29, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Headquarter's

The HQ of the Schindler Holding AG is in Hergiswil, in Ebikon there is only the HQ of Schindler Aufzüge (Schindler elevators). Saemikneu (talk) 15:23, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Facts & Figures

I work for Schindler and I think the entire article needs to be edited regarding facts and figures such as employees, revenue, subsidaries, new technologies and so on. In order to be up to date, I will amend parts of the article and add some more publicly available information within the next few days. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moving steps (talk • contribs) 11:55, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Schindler Group. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060712224301/http://www.schindler.com:80/group_index/group_kg/group_kg_comp/group_kg_comp_his.htm?showtab=30 to http://www.schindler.com/group_index/group_kg/group_kg_comp/group_kg_comp_his.htm?showtab=30
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060923003248/http://www.theelevatormuseum.org/h/schindler.htm to http://www.theelevatormuseum.org/h/schindler.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070902221644/http://www.us.schindler.com:80/sec_index/sec_tech/sec_tech_destination.htm to http://www.us.schindler.com/sec_index/sec_tech/sec_tech_destination.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:03, 13 January 2016 (UTC)