Talk:Carphone Warehouse/Archives/2014

Negative public opinion

There is a certain level of negative public opinion on carphone warehouse (like there is on many large and small companies). I'd personally be interested in reading an unbiased entry on it, potentially with a link to a entry on how many large companies have a level of complaints about it.. --87.194.248.18 (talk) 21:35, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to remove the last sentence of 'marketing gimmicks' "It is clear, however, that this is an attempt to "secure" customers through the Carphone Warehouse takeover, during which some users have experienced an unreliable service, with certain websites (such as YouTube) being totally unavailable for days at a time.[citation needed]" Again, this seems to be a POV, and until the citation is linked in, I feel it should be removed, unless there are any objections --Idnehekim (talk) 20:49, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

There is a tendency to dismiss discussion of the company's alleged poor customer service as "vandalism". It probably isn't. It's just inappropriate for an encylopaedia unless backed up with proper evidence. Such entries should just be removed and the contributor informed that they have to provide encylopaedic entries, rather than matters of opinion - (no matter how rooted in personal experience they are). A single instance of bad treatment by CPW is not enough to show a trend, either. --Plingsby (talk) October 2010

Watchdog has covered poor service by CPW a few times. People interested could reference them. I used to work for CPW so I know what their tricks were.Halbared (talk) 22:22, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

There are repeated attempts to remove the "Customer Service" section - last time around, probably by someone from CPW. It does seem a bit unfair that the Section called "Customer Service" only refers to poor customer service. It ought to be possible to apply a bit of balance and expand that section, as has recently been requested. How do we get examples of good customer service? The only place out there that has any appears to refer to this is CPWs own website. The vast majority of independent "cite"able information is overwhelmingly bad.Plingsby (talk) 11:38, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

There have been a couple of attempts to use the "customer service" section of this article to introduce extremely favourable advertising. I'm all in favour of a bit of balance (and the current entry is a bit negative as discussed above) but all the time the "balance" looks like advertising, I'm going to keep on reverting it. Plingsby (talk) 09:53, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

More advertising in the customer service section. has been removed. Content must be encyclopedic and verifiable.Plingsby (talk) 12:52, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

I've removed uncited matter in the customer service section that stated that the customer service inadequacies had "largely" been fixed. Content should be verifiable and encyclopaedic.Plingsby (talk) 16:22, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

The 'Customer Service' section appears a little unencyclopaedic. The 'long history' of customer service is not found in the references, which seem to go back no further than two years. The references are also made up of consumer review websites, which can be seen to have a slight form of 'confirmation bias', that is to say that people are more likely to be motivated to take the time to write a negative review, whereas contented customers remain silently content. The reviews on the referenced websites also seem to point to a trend of customers ordering products from the Carphone Warehouse website rather than from in its stores, should this be mentioned in this section? Plop3000 (talk) 18:41, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

As Plop3000 has stated, the 'Customer Service' section is unencyclopaedic and the citations are all customer reviews. There's no real factual credence to these claims. Two years is hardly a 'long history' of customer service and this section seems completely biased toward disgruntled customers. If we were to find 5 examples of good customer service over the past 2 years I doubt anyone of us would write "CPW have long history of good customer service etc. etc.". This section should be substantiated with credible citations or removed. Any thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.104.179.100 (talk) 09:34, 17 June 2014 (UTC)