Talk:Indian CFA

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I think it is f-ing LAME (lame, lame, lame) for India to like violate patent and copyright or something, and mislead investors in India and that region into thinking they've found someone awesome enough to have earned the "real CFA" as awarded by the Chartered Financial Analysts Institute. India should be forced by international legal authorities to change the name of its program, so that it does not confuse investors when they're looking for qualified investment authorities and professionals. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.107.177.212 (talk) 12:20, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

The articles title "Indian CFA" is rather preposterous and misleading. This article merely describes the program offered by ICFAI. So I think the title of the article should be changed to a more appropriate one rather than the current absurd title. (Akella 10:25, 15 August 2007 (UTC))

Hi , the article is called Indian CFA as its not available in US and Canada ,the article describes both the pros and cons. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.171.18.239 (talk) 14:52, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Biased

The article shows clear signs of Bias. There could be a strong possibilty of content manipulation by the involved party directly or indirectly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mhr2cool (talk • contribs) 05:30, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

The language is badly garbled. It is often impossible to discern the writer's meaning. I have cleaned up what I could, but the article still needs a lot of work. Albertod4 (talk) 21:20, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

NMASABGiudgwifwKE Wgf u —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.17.198.65 (talk) 14:17, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Futures of ICFAI and CFA

I have deleted the last paragraph as it seems that there is no proof about the brand rebuilding or change in name and it appears to show only the editors personal viewpoint.Shovon 12:59, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Biased

Does a poor job of explaining the litigation between the two parties, the consequences and the trademark battle. Confuses the CFA Institute and tha AIMR.

[edit] Needs Rewriting

The whole article need rewriting. The text, in most cases is badly garbled and gives a confusing meaning. There are a lot of POV material and uncited/unrefernced statements. Needs attention from others. Shovon 12:56, 16 April 2008 (UTC)