Talk:Professional Coin Grading Service
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] NPOV issues?
I'm a bit suspect of the prominent but poorly-integrated mention of an incident that occurred almost 17 years ago. This relatively old element of the company's history would be appropriate in a more complete article on PCGS, but its prominent placement in this stub (with lots of capital letters), seems more intended to cast PCGS in a negative light. I also doubt the factual accuracy of the use of the word "probation" here: is it meant to suggest that the entire organization was placed on "probation"? At any rate, my cursory search for information about the incident yielded absolutely no mention of probation; it seems to me like it is an invented detail. This page indicates that PCGS agreed to "submit its advertising to the FTC for review for the next five years," but as far as I can tell that was the extent of it.
I think this particular item should be removed until it can be integrated (with proper prose and citations...) into a more complete and less biased article.
Any objections / other comments? - Mr. Accident 06:37, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- Sounds fair. Would like to keep it, maybe shortened and defiantly with a reference link. Joe I 20:38, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
-
- Alright. I removed the paragraph and added a brief mention of the affair, and an external link to a NYT article. Hopefully this is much less overt but still informative. Also, I think the Coin World investigation could use a citation here. I didn't find anything with a brief search (Coin World doesn't seem to keep very extensive archives), but I plan to look a little harder when I have more time. Mr. Accident 22:24, 3 March 2007 (UTC)