Talk:Securities fraud

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Editing of this page by new or unregistered users is currently disabled. See the protection policy and protection log for more details. If you cannot edit this page and you wish to make a change, you can request unprotection, log in, or create an account.

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

WikiProject Law Law Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it. ??? This article has not yet received a quality rating on the assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received an importance assessment on the assessment scale. WikiProject Finance This article is part of WikiProject Finance, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Finance. 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. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. WikiProject Investment Securities fraud is within the scope of WikiProject Investment, an effort to improve the quality of articles relating to investment and the personal investor. If you would like to participate, please edit this page and become a member. [Project Page] • [Project Talk] • [Project template] Current Collaborations: Exchange-traded fund

Contents 1 Elements of the crime 2 Adding seciton on types of fraud 3 Question 4 "Characteristics of victims and perpetrators" 5 Review of reversion of edits made by sockpuppet

Elements of the crime

I'm concerned about a sentence added to the lead not so long ago:

The elements of the crime include theft of capital from investors and defrauding the accounting companies about a corporation's financial reports.

This was added in this edit last September by 24.17.171.84 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log). What concerns me is that elements of a crime is a term of art that seems to have a quite different meaning from the one implied by this usage.

I think it should probably be changed to something like "Examples include theft of capital from investors and defrauding the accounting companies about a corporation's financial reports." --Anticipation of a New Lover's Arrival, The 18:48, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree that this whole artice is FUBAR. I am not sure where to begin. Paranthetically, securities fraud would not include defrauding the accountants but would more likely include fraud by the companies and their officers.--Bassettcat (talk) 18:57, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I think this is a better definition for the layman. It is the number two hit on google: http://www.lawyershop.com/news/practice-areas/criminal-law/white-collar-crimes/securities-fraud/--Bassettcat (talk) 19:05, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Adding seciton on types of fraud

I've begun adding a section on types of securities fraud, borrowing material from other Wiki articles. --Bassettcat (talk) 13:46, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Question

Is there not an existing article on the New York Stock Exchange floor trading scandals and, if not, should there be?--Bassettcat (talk) 15:03, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

"Characteristics of victims and perpetrators"

Hello? Hello? Anyone reading this? Another question: "Characteristics of victims and perpetrators" is an essay and it reads as if it is a synthesis of origial research, and is not really allowed. It has no sourcing. Will anyone get upset if I delete it?--Bassettcat (talk) 17:49, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Review of reversion of edits made by sockpuppet

I have reviewed and compared the edits made to this article by User:Bassettcat, now-confirmed sockpuppet of Mantanmoreland, to the version reverted to by User:Pwntjuice following the revelation of the sockpuppetry. The Bassettcat version contains more references and appears to read as a more thorough article. I am not a financial expert, and would appreciate individuals with experience in this field to review the article in detail. I suggest that any questions relating to my action be discussed on this page; I will keep it on my watchlist and will respond to any questions that I can. Risker (talk) 01:58, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

This user is suspected of extensive subtle POV-pushing, just "looking better" isn't good enough - the edits need a much more thorough review than that. --Random832 (contribs) 19:34, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't disagree with you, Random832; unfortunately, I do not have the knowledge base to drill down further. The sourced information agrees with the reference sources, and I have tagged two unreferenced sections. Incidentally, the choice in this case was which subtly-POV version by which sockpuppet to go with, or to completely stub the article, which didn't seem reasonable either. The watches on this series of articles seem to be deterring knowledgeable editors from participating in their editing. I am certainly open to any suggestions you might have. Risker (talk) 19:44, 29 May 2008 (UTC)