Talk:Benjamin Graham
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] | ||
 |
This article is supported by the Science and academia work group. | ||
 |
This article is within the scope of the Columbia University WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Columbia University, her schools, environs, and people. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. |
 |
This article is within the scope of the Economics WikiProject, an effort to create, expand, organize, and improve economics-related articles.. |
| Start | rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale |
| Mid | rated as mid-importance on the importance scale |
Contents |
[edit] Mario Gabelli
Mario Gabelli was listed as a student of Graham's, but journalist Warren Boroson says Gabelli told him otherwise [1], in a column criticizing Wikipedia (see Talk:Warren Boroson). Without a verifiable source for Gabelli, who doesn't have his own article, the citation seems non-notable and a full discussion e.g. Boroson's objections inappropriate. --Dhartung | Talk 22:19, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Great-uncle
According to the introduction to Ben Graham: The Memoirs of the Dean of Wall Street, Benjamin's great-uncle was the Chief Rabbi of Warsaw, who has a Wikepedia entry. Does anyone think that's significant enough to mention in this article.
[edit] inconsistency
Is there not something inconsistent about these two claims? 1. Benjamin Graham (8 May 1894 – 21 September 1976) 2. He currently teaches Latin and World Geography at Millard North High School in Omaha, Nebraska. I don't feel experienced enough to change this, but am I missing something? Rban 07:05, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
- looks like vandalism. I fixed it--Jms2000 16:01, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Merge
I have added merge tags indicating that the information from Benjamin Graham formula should possibly be merged into this article on Benjamin Graham. The formula article does not seem to have enough information to stand on its own, either factually or in regards to context. Without this article, the formula article is confusing to unfamilliar readers such as myself. I believe it would better serve as a section in this article, especially since this article would not be made overly long by the merge. *Vendetta* (whois talk edits) 07:47, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] They are different articles
Despite the shortness of this article, there should be a different pages for biographical information on Graham, on the one hand, and his formulas, on the other. After all, he's quite an important figure in the history of business academia. If anything, I think people should focus on expanding this article. Perhaps, someone wants to create a brief section on his formulas with a preceeding link that directs users to the "main article," with more complete and lengthy information. That is done with many articles that have sub-sections that require separate pages with more detailed information. ask123 17:19, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Should not be merged
The forumula bit should not be merged into the Benjamin Graham article. For anyone who has read "The intelligent investor" and "Security Analysis" know that it's not that simple. The multiplicator CHANGES depending on inflation, average return on equity and so on. It would be missleading to just dish out a forumla here and think you are then investing like graham would have done. I'm highly sceptical to the formula page. Anyone who has read a bit of Grahams work KNOW that you can't dish out a forumla for it.
[edit] The Formula page is rubbish
The formula page is just rubbish. I agree with what is said above. You can NOT make a simple formula and expect to do well with value investing. Come on, the book "security analysis" is approx 700 pages. Why would Graham and Dodd need to write 700 pages if it was just a formula? It's just so much more to it than this formula, that I don't even now where to start. It's misleading to present it this way. Some people might read it and think they are doing sound investment based on this formula, and to be honest they are likely to loose money. If you like to have misleading rubbish that might cause people to actually loose money, then fine go a head and merge it.
[edit] Change "Formulas" to "Teachings" or Scrap That Page
Whoever wrote the "Should Not Be Merged" section (I don't know because s/he did not sign his/her post), I agree. I spoke before without reading into the whole issue. I agree that the formulas hardly encompass Security Analysis or The Intelligent Investor. Maybe the formulas page is garbage to begin with. If that's the case, then someone should revise that page to be an pertaining to all of his teachings. I certainly agree that the formulas alone are hardly enough to enter the market. I just didn't see why a separate page just for formulas was needed. ask123 16:58, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 10:58, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:BenjaminGraham.jpg
Image:BenjaminGraham.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 04:56, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
