Template:Did you know nominations/Corporate debt bubble
- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:56, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Corporate debt bubble
... that a characteristic of the corporate debt bubble is that one-sixth of all publicly-traded companies in the U.S. do not make enough profit to cover the interest on their own corporate bonds? Source: "Access to low-cost credit helped many companies grow and hire. But it also enabled some that weren’t profitable to survive by repeatedly refinancing their debt. These “zombie” firms, which do not earn enough to cover their interest payments, account for 1 in 6 publicly traded U.S. companies" (Washington Post)ALT1:... that the economic turmoil caused by the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic threatens to pop the corporate debt bubble? Source: "The coronavirus panic could threaten a $10 trillion mountain of corporate debt, unleashing a cycle of layoffs and business spending cuts that would hit the economy just as some analysts are warning of a recession." (Washington Post)ALT2:... that the Chinese government encouraged lending to soften the impact of the trade war with the U.S., contributing to the corporate debt bubble?Source: "China’s economic growth slowed to 6.2% in the second quarter, its weakest pace in at least 27 years, as demand at home and abroad faltered in the face of mounting U.S. trade pressure. To revive investment and protect jobs, Beijing has been encouraging banks to lend more, particularly to struggling smaller firms." (Reuters)- ALT3:... that the low interest rates of the Great Recession contributed to the corporate debt bubble? Source: "A decade of historically low interest rates has allowed companies to sell record amounts of bonds to investors" (Washington Post)
Created by Featous (talk). Self-nominated at 00:41, 12 March 2020 (UTC).
New enough and plenty, plenty long enough. QPQ-exempt (author has no prior DYK credits). The article has a tag on it. ALT0 checks out, is interesting (though might be worth rewording at the front end) and is cited. ALT1 also checks out. @Featous: this article would be ready if not for the "may not represent a worldwide view of the subject" tag up top. Raymie (t • c) 22:05, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
- The quick and easy way to fix this is to move it to Corporate debt bubble in the United States or similar, Johnbod (talk) 11:53, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
- Maybe 10-20% of the problem was/is in European markets (speaking very loosely), so I haven't begun to think about how to discuss that if the title changes. Maybe sticking in its own non-US section (?). Absolutely unthinkable things have happened on this topic since the nom, and I haven't sat down and done the additional research for a high-level structural edit for the before times. - Featous (talk) 15:41, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
- If you change the title you wouldn't need to change anything, I think. My comment when adding the tag was "Good article, but apart from one short para is all about the US - a rename might be best. The text & captions need liberal sprinkling with clarification as to whether only the US is meant, as mostly seems to be the case." This still seems about right, & the few references to Europe would still be ok with a US title. I realize the article has been moving to reflect current events, & there's no rush I think. I still think it's a very good article! Johnbod (talk) 17:00, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
- I have to agree on this, putting a US-centric article on the front page that is purportedly a general article on the subject could be very irritating for non-US readers. SpinningSpark 12:04, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
- I have reworked the article, making it explicit that the bubble is centered in but not limited to the US market. China had an entirely different set of factors for their bubble that required a separate section. Can I get a re-look, esp from User:Johnbod? Thanks, Featous (talk) 15:59, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
- I have to agree on this, putting a US-centric article on the front page that is purportedly a general article on the subject could be very irritating for non-US readers. SpinningSpark 12:04, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
- If you change the title you wouldn't need to change anything, I think. My comment when adding the tag was "Good article, but apart from one short para is all about the US - a rename might be best. The text & captions need liberal sprinkling with clarification as to whether only the US is meant, as mostly seems to be the case." This still seems about right, & the few references to Europe would still be ok with a US title. I realize the article has been moving to reflect current events, & there's no rush I think. I still think it's a very good article! Johnbod (talk) 17:00, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
- Maybe 10-20% of the problem was/is in European markets (speaking very loosely), so I haven't begun to think about how to discuss that if the title changes. Maybe sticking in its own non-US section (?). Absolutely unthinkable things have happened on this topic since the nom, and I haven't sat down and done the additional research for a high-level structural edit for the before times. - Featous (talk) 15:41, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
- The quick and easy way to fix this is to move it to Corporate debt bubble in the United States or similar, Johnbod (talk) 11:53, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
- The main hook is too long. It is just within the 200B outside limit, but the length makes it not very hooky. It could be edited down to something much snappier, still using the same fact. SpinningSpark 12:22, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
- After trying to rewrite it two times, I would like to suggest just using ALT3. It's boring, but succinct. And things are changing so fast that any statement made in present tense is questionable. - Featous (talk) 15:59, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
- You should strike the hooks you no longer want to be considered. SpinningSpark 16:11, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
- Done. Thanks, Featous (talk) 17:03, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
- ALT3 is fine, but the tag is the current blocker. Raymie (t • c) 00:18, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
- Can I remove the tag myself? I wouldn't hesitate normally, but I'm not sure what is proper during a DYK review... - Featous (talk) 01:17, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
- Ok, a lot has been added, but there is still (especially in the bottom half) a lot where it is unclear if US numbers are being given (usually I expect), or global or something else. Examples: caption starting "Mutual funds were estimated to hold about one-sixth of outstanding corporate bonds"; "By mid-2018, 77% of corporate loans were cov-lite"; "On 12 March, the spread on junk bonds increased to 7.42%, the highest level since December 2015, indicating less willingness to buy corporate debt"; "On 9 April, the Fed announced that it would inject up to $2.3 trillion more into the economy and markets through various measures." Johnbod (talk) 03:02, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
- Johnbod, thank you so much for the feedback. It has really helped the quality of the article. I think I've caught and qualified all the country-specific figures. One Fed figure was removed because the Fed source document simply didn't define their metrics. I assume it's all U.S. markets, but can't say for sure. There's also been a few more updates at the end. Cheers, Featous (talk) 15:37, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
- Ok, a lot has been added, but there is still (especially in the bottom half) a lot where it is unclear if US numbers are being given (usually I expect), or global or something else. Examples: caption starting "Mutual funds were estimated to hold about one-sixth of outstanding corporate bonds"; "By mid-2018, 77% of corporate loans were cov-lite"; "On 12 March, the spread on junk bonds increased to 7.42%, the highest level since December 2015, indicating less willingness to buy corporate debt"; "On 9 April, the Fed announced that it would inject up to $2.3 trillion more into the economy and markets through various measures." Johnbod (talk) 03:02, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
- Done. Thanks, Featous (talk) 17:03, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
- You should strike the hooks you no longer want to be considered. SpinningSpark 16:11, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
- After trying to rewrite it two times, I would like to suggest just using ALT3. It's boring, but succinct. And things are changing so fast that any statement made in present tense is questionable. - Featous (talk) 15:59, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
