Talk:Meredith Whitney

Employer

i changed her employer from oppenheimer to Meredith Whitney LLC. she left oppenheimer to start her own firm. 129.64.148.17 (talk) 03:40, 22 February 2009 (UTC)jonah

Belated thanks. Now it's Kenbelle Capital LP. —Patrug (talk) 15:59, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Self-fulfilling prophecy

Should this sentence on the article page require a source? "She is an advocate of the self-fulfilling prophecy. If you think it is true then it will become true." Terry (talk) 00:44, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Belated thanks. Sentence has been removed. —Patrug (talk) 15:59, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Biographical details

First sentence says she was born in 1970, but under the picture placeholder it says she was born in 1969. 69.203.103.178 (talk) 03:09, 7 April 2009 (UTC) Jay

It says she graduated from Yale, yet under her picture it says Brown. Which is it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.100.254.50 (talk) 21:59, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Belated thanks. 1969. Brown. Personal details now are sourced from WSJ article. —Patrug (talk) 15:59, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Persistent controversy addition

To the IP editors adding a Controversy section with one item: several policies and guidelines argue against this addition. Per WP:BLP, "Be very firm about the use of high quality sources." Per WP:CRIT, "Sections ... dedicated to controversies about a topic are generally discouraged." Per WP:RECENT, "Recentism is writing or editing without a long-term, historical view, thereby inflating the importance of a topic that has received recent public attention". AV3000 (talk) 15:33, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Attempting to initiate discussion once more before escalating to WP:BLPN; see WP:BRD for WP's bold/revert/discuss cycle. (Regarding Media Matters, they are not referenced in this BLP, which makes their use elsewhere an inappropriate WP:OTHERSTUFF argument.) AV3000 (talk) 04:08, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

When has it been agreed on for this site that media watchdog groups like the Media Research Center aren't acceptable sources?--65.11.117.32 (talk) 14:45, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

You haven't responded to the full set of problems with this addition, so I'll walk though them again. Wikipedia is not a newspaper, a soapbox, or an indiscriminate collection of information; Wikipedia's content must have a neutral point of view, be verifiable using reliable sources without original research, must have appropriate weight, and biographies of living persons have further heightened requirements. Please read these policies. As I've already pointed out, the proposed addition fails more than one of these tests - it is inappropriately weighted (recent and minor) criticism that is cited only to a self-described non-NPOV ("leader in documenting, exposing and neutralizing liberal media bias") blog source. Put simply, it would be an appropriate addition only if multiple high-quality NPOV sources were provided. (And yes, to flip it around, it would likewise be inappropriate if Media Matters were the sole source of BLP criticism.) AV3000 (talk) 03:36, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Belated thanks. The most-relevant criticisms now are integrated into the Career and Recognition sections. —Patrug (talk) 15:59, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

“The Oracle of Wall Street”

There is no citation supporting that she was dubbed “The Oracle of Wall Street” by Bloomberg? 2604:3D08:B278:4500:B488:6951:6C15:BA6 (talk) 04:23, 19 April 2024 (UTC)