Do we really need individual links to all of GE's media assets in the template? As a proportion of revenue, it's a tiny segment, but the editors of this template would have us think that is primarily what GE does. Their primary business is really financial services, but I don't think the template should be dominated by that, either. The list of media assets is a big ugly mess with footnotes and such. Perhaps it should be restricted to the major operating divisions. —Joseph/N328KF (Talk) 03:43, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Since nobody has seen fit to even respond, I will either start removing these items or split them into a separate template named Template:General Electric media assets. —Joseph/N328KF (Talk) 12:41, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

I second you. All 6 business units must be shown in proportion. GE is not just a media company -- Lost 12:50, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

I moved the template to a better name, Template:NBC Universal. CoolKatt number 99999 18:48, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

I totally rewrote the template to match the format of {{Dell Inc}}. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 03:48, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

I am hoping we can reformat this a bit to reduce the width of the template. on a 1024x768 screen you get one column of links due to the excessive group widths and image width. one option would be to try using an image that has a taller aspect ratio. another option would be to move the headings over the lists, ala {{navbox with collapsible groups}}, but without having them collapsed. any suggestions? Frietjes (talk) 14:29, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm opposed to the use of collapsible groups as I don't think the template is large enough to justify it. I'm happy to try images with a taller aspect ratio.Rangoon11 (talk) 16:23, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

yes, I don't think they should be collapsed either, which is why I said "but without having them collapsed". a taller image would be the best option. Frietjes (talk) 17:22, 27 April 2013 (UTC)