User talk:Maleopold
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
|
[edit] Biographies
The best place for you to public an autobiography would be on your own website, rather than somewhere on Wikipedia. Friday (talk) 22:32, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Marc j lane
A couple of points about this article and its associated AfD:
- The article is currently capitalised in that way because that was how it was capitalised when it was first written. I know you didn't mean to give him a lower-case surname, and I think everyone's been there and done that with capitals here, but please resist the temptation to re-capitalise his name in the AfD, as it breaks the link to the article under discussion.
- Currently, there are no sources cited (per our guidelines for citation), which means that it's very much harder to back up the claims being made in the article.
- A biography needs to meet the standards at WP:BIO in order for the subject to be worthy of inclusion. If you believe that Mr Lane meets these standards, I'll be happy to help you fix up the article to demonstrate precisely that.
- As I've said at the AfD, there are no distinctions between "a biography" and "an article" here. Biographies are one of the types of article that this Encyclopedia (as any other Encyclopedia) houses.
If you have more questions or need help figuring out how we run things around here, you're most welcome to leave a comment on my Talk page. To do this, just click where it says "Schreit mich an" and then click on the Plus-sign button at the top of the page. I'll be only too pleased to help out. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 01:21, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] How to proceed
Have a look at your userpage. I've created a link to a "test page" or a "sandbox". All you need to do now is type the article up there and let me know when you're finished. Nobody's going to delete it while it's in your "userspace", as we call it, and when it's ready to go we can move it to the main part of the encyclopedia. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 21:55, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
Please check out the new article with references, let me know if it's on the right path. Thanks for all your help! Maleopold 22:12, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
- I'd say you're on the right track, but we could still do with some explanation of quite how he was/is a pioneer in the field. It might just be that I don't know much about the subject area, but it still feels as though he's someone who wrote some books, rather than someone who really pioneered it. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 22:45, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
It's not so much "socially responsible investing" that Marc has pioneered as SRI has been around for well over a hundred years. Rather, within the movement, he is the person who was really the first to empirically prove that SRI could be done in a way that provided investors with the ability to achieve competitive or better market returns vs. traditional asset management. Historically (as mentioned in my draft), SRI management has been marginalized due to the fact that it has lagged in performance compared to traditional money management approaches. This made SRI something which tended to appeal only to those who wanted to somehow salve their conscience, and were willing to take a hit financially at the same time. The Advocacy Investing approach, and why it was and is so notable within the movement, and why it got so much attention, was because it provided scientific research from an 8-year study showing how SRI can be done both "responsibly" AND profitably, which isn't such a small task. This has opened the doors to huge institutional investors (as well as individuals) who couldn't consider SRI approaches before because it's performance lag violated certain "prudent investor" and suitability guidelines. In addition to these things, the book laying out the research and argument came at the forefront of many articles which came out and are continuing to come out re: the fact that SRI and CSR issues are, indeed, quantifiable and can be profitiable, often more profitable, than the way corporations have been managed in the past. On a global scale, this is truly revelatory because the implications are that of a whole new way of running business enterprises like we have never seen before, at least not on the scale where it is the "prefered" method of management within the capital markets.
Is this clear now? How would you suggest incorporating what I just said, or is it already evident in the article? Thanks! Maleopold 21:19, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
- I've responded on my Talk page. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 21:12, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
