Talk:World Stock Exchange

Request for semiprotection

This article is constantly reverted by IPs within the range of Australia; these reverts remove NPOV from the article, it is to note that the WSE owner is from Australia. This is a clear case of Luke Connell applying the "Criticism Gag" on other sites different than his, and a clear violation of Wikipedia's Conflict of Interest guidelines. 201.124.61.205 (talk) 19:04, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protection is only used in cases of persistent vandalism, which does not appear to be the case here. Few things need to be pointed out: Blogs are not acceptable sources, so its unsurprising that this keeps being removed - please see WP:RS and WP:V for some policies pertaining to the use of sources in articles. Material that is unsourced is likely to be removed as well, the same policies apply. And finally, just because someone affiliated with the subject comes from Australia does not automatically mean anyone from Australia is that person - all edits will be judged on their merits. Shell ^babelfish 19:23, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

The problem with this (and basically any other Second Life-related article) is that there is no "official" news source; the only one there was retired almost a year ago, and most of the news has been published in sites like your2ndplace.com anyway. I'd also add that most of these sources are former WSE users/clients (there are no "current" users, as the service has been down since November 2008) and the consensus would be around or at 100% for all CEO's listed in between December 2007 (right before the first super-halt) and the November 2008, which is when the current "market halt" began. Basically, anyone who had funds or stocks in the system before Dec. 2007 never has, and probably never will see his money again. This fact has either not been addressed on this article, or removed under the premise of "unreliable sources". Danixdefcon5 (talk) 14:59, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Understandable and yet there are several sources for the articles that were published in mainstream media; those are the kinds of things that likely rise to the level of being appropriate for inclusion. Perhaps the article needs a complete rewrite - information that is currently too technical for an encyclopedia article and unsourced information should go and the sources given (along with any newer third-party sources) could be used to write a better overview. Shell ^babelfish 16:00, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Advertisement

This is clearly an advertisement and not an objective entry. The overwhelmingly positive nature of the writing and careful omission of the accusations levied against Luke Connell finds this entry wanting. A very thorough revision is necessary, presuming that this entry is worthy of remaining on Wikipedia at all. Please see http://www.your2ndplace.com/node/1002 or http://www.slcapex.com/forums/topic/general/2157 for more information. NTRLBIS (talk) 12:50, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Submitting for Speedy Deletion

I am submitting this entry for speedy deletion pursuant to Wikipedia's standards governing such. The tone of this writing suggests it is a mere advertisement, has been the repeated target of vandals, and revising this article to factually report a 'virtual company' of limited exposure outweighs the utility of allowing it to remain. In case the previous links aren't credible enough, I am including another one from a reputable company to illustrate how factual information has been ommitted. If necessary, I will provide numerous other links.

http://secondlife.reuters.com/stories/2007/07/25/world-stock-exchange-hit-by-l32-million-theft/

13:16, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

I can attest to the stealling of money by this group. I have an account with 23K + WIC which I am not allowedto withdraw. they tok my money USD but wil not let me with draw it. These guys are crooks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.253.72.69 (talk) 03:48, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Case for not deleted, but changing to make neutral

If Wikipedia is to be the repository of knowledge, then articles like this should be left in. If we were removing based on 'virtual companies' then I also suggest we remove the Umbrella Corporation or Shinra Electric Power Company. This being said -- this article is not in a neutral tone and I feel this would benefit from cleaning up in a more objective tone.

Atomicblue (talk) 15:16, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

User 114.74.222.105 has continually deleted content which, as per the author, was added to balance the WSE entry. The entries balanced the WSE wiki and successfully got the story out of being "neutrality disputed". Now that the bias status has been removed, the above IP is attempting to remove the edits. The IP originates from Australia.

If this continues, the case for “speedy deletion” should be reenacted and the entry should, again, be set as "neutrality disputed".

Given Luke Connell is based in Australia, its likely its him or his roommate doing the edits.75.67.80.68 (talk) 00:11, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Shell Kinney

Why does Shell Kinney delete any addition to this article which is negative against the WSE? Most are facts and many even have citations, yet Shell comes along and deletes them. Has she been hired by Luke Connell to help protect his Ponzi Scheme?

Because your additions don't follow Wikipedia policy. For instance, when claiming a clause is "controversial" and has been used to "gag" Exchange members, you need to provide a source that says so. Provide a link to the clause itself isn't sufficient - a reliable third-party source needs to say its controversial and that it gags members. If you have any questions about specific information I've removed and why, I'd be happy to answer them. Shell ^babelfish 16:04, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

10/08/2009 has passed already but yet no WSE

10/08/2009 has passed already but yet no WSE, he did it again. Still there are thousands of people that had an account on the WSE with no access to there deposits made in 2006 - 2007 and 2008. Funds Luke Connel has left stage with just like that and nobody seem to care or filed a lawsuit against this scammer. Another cyberpunk gone free... it's a shame !!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.21.252.93 (talk) 13:07, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Legal status of WSE?

What's the legal status of the WSE? Are they subject to regulation by the SEC? The article on Intrade lists some of the legal challenges they are facing. Also, is the WSE liable for prosecution regarding the people who ran off with other people's money? (virtual currency, but convertible to actual $$) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.69.158.216 (talk) 01:16, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Pending changes

This article is one of a number selected for the early stage of the trial of the Wikipedia:Pending Changes system on the English language Wikipedia. All the articles listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Queue are being considered for level 1 pending changes protection.

The following request appears on that page:

Comments on the suitability of theis page for "Pending changes" would be appreciated.

Please update the Queue page as appropriate.

Note that I am not involved in this project any much more than any other editor, just posting these notes since it is quite a big change, potentially

Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 00:41, 17 June 2010 (UTC).