Talk:Porter Stansberry: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 16:24, 15 September 2011

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Porter Stansberry 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.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Conservatism Unassessed

	Conservatism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism 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.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Investment fraud

This content must be properly sourced per WP:BLP and WP:BLPPRIMARY.– Lionel ^(talk) 12:18, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The case in question was covered by (among others) CBS News, BusinessWeek, the Baltimore Sun, and the New York Times. The Times went so far as to editorialize against Stansberry's prosecution, arguing that while his actions might seem "unorthodox or even unethical", they were not illegal under existing law.

Given the existence of proper, BLP-appropriate sourcing, would you like to take a shot at writing suitable coverage of this incident for the article? MastCell ^Talk 16:24, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 12:18, 15 September 2011 edit Lionelt (talk \| contribs) Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers 26,463 edits →‎Investment fraud: new section ← Previous edit		Revision as of 16:24, 15 September 2011 edit undo MastCell (talk \| contribs) Edit filter managers, Administrators 43,153 edits →‎Investment fraud: here are some better sources; would you like to take a shot at incorporating them? Next edit →
Line 5:		Line 5:

	This content must be properly sourced per WP:BLP and WP:BLPPRIMARY.– [[user:Lionelt\|Lionel]] <sup>([[user talk:Lionelt\|talk]])</sup> 12:18, 15 September 2011 (UTC)		This content must be properly sourced per WP:BLP and WP:BLPPRIMARY.– [[user:Lionelt\|Lionel]] <sup>([[user talk:Lionelt\|talk]])</sup> 12:18, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
			:The case in question was covered by (among others) [http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/06/28/national/main6626819.shtml CBS News], ''[http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9GKB86G1.htm BusinessWeek]'', the ''[http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/baltsun/access/1317903191.html?dids=1317903191:1317903191&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&type=current&date=Aug+10%2C+2007&author=Tricia+Bishop&pub=The+Sun&desc=%241.5+MILLION+PAYBACK+ORDERED+IN+SEC+SUIT&pqatl=google Baltimore Sun]'', and the ''[http://www.nytimes.com/2003/08/03/business/e-mail-stock-tip-tests-limits-of-securities-laws.html New York Times]''. The ''Times'' went so far as to [http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/04/opinion/04sun3.html editorialize against Stansberry's prosecution], arguing that while his actions might seem "unorthodox or even unethical", they were not illegal under existing law.<p>Given the existence of proper, BLP-appropriate sourcing, would you like to take a shot at writing suitable coverage of this incident for the article? '''[[User:MastCell\|MastCell]]''' <sup>[[User Talk:MastCell\|Talk]]</sup> 16:24, 15 September 2011 (UTC)