Talk:Charles Ponzi
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
Please rate the article and, if you wish, leave comments here regarding your assessment or the strengths and weaknesses of the article. |
||
| This article is part of WikiProject Crime, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide on true crime and criminology-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. | |
| B | This article has been rated as B-class on the assessment scale. |
| Mid | This article is on a subject of mid-importance for crime-related articles. |
|
WikiProject Crime To-do:
|
|
Contents |
[edit] Mugshot
I think the mugshot is from Ponzi's arrest in Montreal in 1907. It may be from his stint in Alabama. He's too young here for 1920, and Zuckoff's book mentions that the Boston papers published his old Montreal mugshot next to a recent (1920) photo of him with a moustache drawn on for comparison. He definitely didn't have a moustache in the 1920s. If I can prove this I'll amend the caption. -coljac
[edit] Cleanup
I just read over the article and it seems to contain a significant amount of biased and uncited statements. Statements such as "This was a fortunate choice.." , and questions such as "why didn't Ponzi take advantage of it himself?", etc don't belong in an encyclopedia. In addition, nothing at all is cited. I'm going to put up the cleanup tag to hopefully get it improved a bit. --Dr. WTF 02:28, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Some comments from 2003
This page seems to have some subtle vandalism. Could someone pls check? My monitor is broken and won't display reds, so I can't see what has been altered
Seems to have? Can you be a bit more specific please? Also note the page has not changed for months ... would it really have been left for so long I wonder? Any hints would be v helpful though.
Such as "If the cashflow faltered, the pyramid would collapse and take him to Hell with it.
Whatever."
It's somewhat more colloquial in style than the average article, but I'd hardly call it vandalism.
The page seems to have been vandalized by someone- the Security Exchange Company? Or is that just a coincidence....
- I don't know, but I do know you're answering a 3 year old comment :) --kingboyk 13:39, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] TV ADVERTISING TOUTING "THIS WEBSITE"
Bruce Berman, http;//www.296crazyfox.com, and all of the others are a new switch on the pyramid scam. They all tell you "FREE" information about how to get rich quick can be yours. Log on now...
When you do, you find that you have to pay $9.95 for shipping and handling, THEN you have 14 days to look at the information FREE. If you keep it you pay MORE, (typically $39.95) and if not you have to send it back, but forfeit your initial $9.95. These are advertised on otherwise reputable TV, such as Fox, MSNBC, History Channel, Discovery, and most major outlets.
Write to them to complain.
Look at my webpage http://www.otgadventures.com/Links.htm for more of these links.
[edit] Citations?
This page seems severely undercited. 156.56.41.63
- The citation style I used is pretty legit, I used it on Matsuo Basho's page too. Shii (tock) formerly Ashibaka 21:39, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Article seems more like story
This article seems a lot more like some story meant to entertain rather than a serious means of communicating information. The amount of detail is applauded, but sometimes it seems like there is too much of it; "He slept on the floor of the restaurant as he had no other place to live, but managed to work his way up to the position of waiter," and other such lines. Details like this are 1. extremely specific and therefore susceptible to being incorrect and 2. sounds like the tragic tale of some tramp living a destitute life in the big city, which most of us have probably heard in some version or another. Comments like "Ponzi was unfazed" are grammatically simple and detract from the sense of reading an encyclopedia, and may be better if it was merged with the following sentence; i.e. "Unfazed, Ponzi..."
So, in essence, lines that make the article seem like a story, whether through use of language more suitable in a story (like "There he met an Italian girl, Rose Gnecco, who was swept off her feet by Ponzi's charm." and "Gnecco's love for Ponzi remained unswayed.") or through overly specific detail (like "Charles Morse convinced doctors he was dying by eating soap shavings, and was released early," which has little or no bearing on the rest of the article) should either be removed or merged with other sentences to remove the sense of bias.
