Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 20:19, 8 December 2006

What should go on a user's discussion page?

Welcome!

Hello, Smallbones, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  SlimVirgin 00:00, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Spot price

Moved the discussion from my talk page to Talk:Spot price

Soros, Black Weds, Malaysia

Its well known history and disclosed in publicly available documents. There are already links from the Bank Negara and Black Weds pages in Misplaced Pages.

Options

Yeah.. I'd love to help but would need to sit down with a textbook and a towel around my head before I could really help with covered call. What's htere now seems fine at a first glance. The Land 16:09, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Hedging (finance)

No, go right ahead. You can't make it any worse and you could make it a lot better. See ]  :-)

Disputed English grammar

You recently added a Fats Waller comment to the "Generic you" section of disputed English grammar. I would like to know why, and why you reverted my edit without discussion. I've posted on the article's talk page. Please let me know what you think. -Phoenixrod 08:32, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

James Dicks

Seeing the work you've been doing to James Dicks, I changed my opinion on the AfD to weak keep. I would probably have withdrawn it if it wasn't due to end so soon anyway. My change of opinion should result in a keep unless there is some sort of late rally. --GraemeL 17:49, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Rule Based Trading

Hi! Seemed to me Rule Based Trading was created mostly to advertise the Timetotrade software (which I tagged for deletion). I just removed the ad link from Rule Based Trading.

To delete articles there are three processes:

• Speedy deletion. An article can be "speedied" if it fits in one of a handful of categories: patent nonsense, attack pages ("Jim Smith is stupid and smells"), blatant copyright violation, ... Insert one of the tags at the top, e.g. {{nonsense}} and an admin will check your proposal and delete the article.
• Proposed deletion. Things you consider uncontroversial deletions but don't fit speedy deletion criteria. Advertisements, non-notable products / companies / web sites, ...
• Articles for deletion. It's educational to read current discussions to learn how AfD works. When in doubt take an article to AfD so others can help decide.

Non-article stuff (images, redirects, ...) have their own processes, Misplaced Pages:Deletion policy lists those.

When you tag something for deletion you usually need to "baby-sit" it. If someone deletes a "speedy" tag you can re-insert it (unless they give a good reason why the article should be kept). If someone deletes a prod tag you can't re-insert it, you should AfD it instead.

In the case of Rule Based Trading we have another common way to deal with it: instead of deleting, merge it. If there is any salvageable content in the article copy it over to technical analysis. Then clear the entire Rule Based Trading article and replace it with the line:

#REDIRECT ]

That works well when the article title is something that someone might search for, but the subject is best covered in another article. Googling for "rule based trading" returns a number of pages so it's conceivable someone might search for the term on Misplaced Pages. If the TA article is what they should find then go for it! Weregerbil 13:48, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

The Soros Article

Thanks for your help. We seem to have kept some really ugly insinuation out of an important piece. --Christofurio 19:15, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Day trading

I reverted your changes to Day trading. We are not here to warn readers, we are here to inform them. Putting warnings in the introduction makes this seem like a manual, not an encyclopaedia entry. In much the same way that Nazism doesn't have a "this is a very dangerous philosophy" warning in the intro. Yandman 09:29, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Always happy to help :)

Hi, hope you will find my additions adequate for the foreign exchange article and I will try to do my best. I agree with you on the forex brokers but I must say that some sites have great information about forex in general, which will fit well into this article. The only downside is that we might need to cite them in the references. The way I see it is that most of those sites want to be listed in the external links because they might get traffic from wikipedia, but maybe it will ok if we put some resources who might be brokers in the reference section but have good informational sites and do not strongly endorse the forex gambling as you referred to it. I would like to hear you opinion on this and maybe even let me know of the major spammers so we might be able to do something about that Davidoff 16:11, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

James Dicks

Hi Smallbones (fab username, BTW)!

Thanks for asking for my help. I've done no research and not looked deeply into the article in question, as I don't feel anyone involved needs someone to make a decision: I think you sensibly want an outside element to mediate and find out what problems editors have with the article.

On that basis, I've written a nice, if over-long, message to the anon editor giving them advice on things they can do as a first step without causing an edit war.

Going forward, I'll watchlist the page in question (that doesn't mean "police the page") and try to advise the anon, should s/he contact me as requested.

I'll say similar to you as I did to the anon: I'm not making judgments and am staying deliberately ignorant of the article history. I'm interested in what all "sides" have, concisely, to say and do here. If there are "sides", of course: I haven't really checked.

I'm going to work on the basis that all "sides" are acting in good faith, and we can all improve Misplaced Pages by working together! ➨ ЯEDVERS 20:53, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

PS: if the anon gets an account and nominates the article for deletion as requested, please be gentle with them on AfD! ➨ ЯEDVERS

Delta neutral

Thanks for the updates to the delta neutral article. I think they make it more readable. Ronnotel 16:38, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Misplaced Pages better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 01:03, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Robert Prechter

Could you check out Robert Prechter and the associated Socionomics? Smallbones 19:51, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

I fear there is not much that I can help. If an individual like Folsom or an organization like his "Socionomics Institute" will gain a lot financially by having a favourable treatment of their fringe theories in Misplaced Pages and by pushing a positive POV on them, then no amount of arguments from disinterested Wikipedians short of an RfArb will stop him, as he can dedicate a massive amount of time to revise and revert "his" articles and to restate his fair few points on the talk page ad nauseam. This is one of the fundamental weaknesses in WP. -- Marcika 14:01, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

I like your style

Smallbones, I like your style. Keep it up. The more you keep throwing at the socionomics "cult of believers", the more they will just keep getting nasty and hissy and resorting to their normal psychological attacks of people. Socionomics and the Wave Principle are not without merit - just not the way they are conventionally sold. There are few places where the "dissenting view" can be heard (as in, would a newsletter called "Elliott Wave Fearist" get many subscribers?) so WP and Yelnick remain the pre-eminent forums for engaging in debate. They need to shut up, or raise their game basically, and it's pressure like you exert that will maybe get them to do it. Punanimal 23:01, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Request for Arbitration

This is to notify you that I have named you in a request for arbitration. You should shortly find the request here.

--Rgfolsom 20:19, 8 December 2006 (UTC)