Talk:Subprime crisis impact timeline

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

NetBank[edit]

A prior version of this article claimed NetBank was the first FDIC-insured bank to fail since the S&L crisis, but that is clearly false. Actual figures from the FDIC (all failures since 10/1/2000 and historical report of all failures since FDIC began in 1934) show that the only years EVER with zero FDIC failures were 2005 and 2006; the streak was broken earlier in 2007 before NetBank's failure. 2008 has had one bank failure already. --RBBrittain (talk) 22:51, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bot report : Found duplicate references ![edit]

In the last revision I edited, I found duplicate named references, i.e. references sharing the same name, but not having the same content. Please check them, as I am not able to fix them automatically :)

  • "Netbank loss" :
    • {{cite news | title=NetBank Files for Bankruptcy After Regulators Take Over Unit | date=30 September [[2007]] | publisher=[[Bloomberg L.P.|Bloomberg]] | url=http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=ajOPHuXaoV3c&refer=home }}
    • {{cite news | title=NetBank Files for Bankruptcy After Regulators Take Over Unit | date=30 September [[2007]] | publisher=[[Bloomerberg]] | url=http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=ajOPHuXaoV3c&refer=home }}

DumZiBoT (talk) 08:58, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keeping this in Timeline Only format[edit]

The two sections and chart below the timeline should be integrated into it since its confusing as to why they are not if this is supposed to be a timeline. Since most of the companies mentioned have their own wiki articles, a mere note about changes in their status should be sufficient. A few of the less significant events probably could be deleted, while other info, like the Fannie/Freddie/CRA info I added, necessary. And here and there with more controversial claims we need refs. (Once we know if one of the duplicate refs above completely eliminated we can fix the second one if it remains.) Carol Moore 16:14, 27 September 2008 (UTC)Carolmooredc

I am getting close to doing this. Also I think I will format entries to clearly separate govt actions from various market events by putting two asterisks per each market event like the below (ignore extra asterisks which should disappear in final). If there's a strong objection, tell me now before I do it :-)
    • August 7: Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton proposes a $1 billion bailout fund to help homeowners at risk for foreclosure [1].
    • August 17: Federal Reserve lowers the discount rate by 50 basis points to 5.75% from 6.25%.

Carol Moore 18:10, 3 October 2008 (UTC)Carolmooredc

I like your idea to distinguish the entries but your example is confusing. Your explanation makes sense though. --Gogino (talk) 04:26, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The other possibility is to put the effects in italics, since I only see a newspaper title in italics and I thought only books belong in them. However, this maybe less relevant per the below. ~Carolmooredc

References

  1. ^ Countrywide Taps $11.5 Billion Credit Line From Banks

Timeline Bias[edit]

The timeline excludes several important actions such as the encouragement by the clinton administration to make mortgage loans based upon race or neighborhood. In addition it excludes the numerous attempts that were made to try to circumvent the problem. As usual wikipedia shows its bias. 17:34, 28 September 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.120.109.174 (talk)

Wikipedia is whatever its editors make it. It's a lot of work for free, for most of us anyway. Feel free to find WP:reliable sources and contribute. Carol Moore 21:09, 28 September 2008 (UTC)Carolmooredc
Reality and reliable sources have a liberal bias. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.18.170.151 (talk) 05:52, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Putting an ending date on this?[edit]

It seems to me that this time line should end sometime soon, after the crisis peaks and things start to normalize, even if at a new low with various fixes still in progress. After that it seems new entries should be directly tied to subprime mortgage issues and cleaning up those issues, and not go into every detail of every govt move all over the world that is a ramification of the US subprime mortgage crisis, as some of the more recent entries have. There are two good articles for that sort of thing: Global financial crisis of September–October 2008 and Global financial crisis of September–October 2008. Anyway, at some point I was going to shorten or clean out least relevant things, but many of these new entries perhaps sooner. Carol Moore 22:07, 16 October 2008 (UTC)Carolmooredc

Did you want to mention also Economic_crisis_of_2008?
Yes, this crisis spilled over to the global crisis. --Gogino (talk) 04:32, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If I missed Economic_crisis_of_2008; stick it in where you think it goes. Also, looking at Timeline of the United States housing bubble I realized a lot of the more detailed earler info about govt laws and regulations belonged there and copied it there. But since articles should not be exactly the same, at some point soon I'll pare down those earlier entries a bit and refer people to the housing bubble article. I don't know how much that might effect/affect ;-) the need to italicize or whatever private moves. Also, some of the less important bankruptcies and crashes might be removed or consolidated. After it's cleaned up, the formatting issue probably will become clearer. Carol Moore 13:07, 18 October 2008 (UTC)Carolmooredc
You wrote Global financial crisis of September–October 2008 twice. What did you want the other link to be? -- Gogino (talk) 03:04, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I missed above til now but now sure what you mean.
We generally agree to cut out a lot of dated details a few weeks back. Now there is the newest addition of a lot of dates about the financial crisis in general and worldwide again.
I think we should make it clear that this article is about the timeline of development of the United States subprime mortgage crisis and not about all the credit cards that weren't paid off; or bad non-mortgage loans that were not paid; or the results of global trade deficits or speculative trading in commodities; or even about the couple countries that also had a housing bubble burst.
There are other timelines (some which are too short; others may need to be created) and articles where this is more appropriate. Like Financial crisis of 2007–2008 and [Global financial crisis of September–October 2008]] and Economic crisis of 2008.
I'd propose to limit material entered here the first two sentences read something like:
The subprime crisis impact timeline lists dates relevant to the creation of a United States housing bubble and the 2005 housing bubble burst (or market correction) and the subprime mortgage crisis which developed during 2007 and 2008. It includes United States enactment of government laws and regulations, as well as public and private actions and initiates which effected the housing industry and related banking and investment activity. It also notes information and statistics about governmental and private activities and trends and details of important incidents in the United States, such as bankruptcies and takeovers. For more information on reverberations of this crisis throughout the global financial system see Financial crisis of 2007–2008 or Global financial crisis of September–October 2008. Carol Moore 00:35, 25 November 2008 (UTC)Carolmooredc

Neutrality of the main page is disputed[edit]

Please make it clear what you are discussing. --Gogino (talk) 04:48, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality of the main page is disputed here

How is the neutrality disputed besides ECOA below? --Gogino (talk) 05:32, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, unless someone explains better why this mere listing of events is POV, without even making suggestions on how to make it less so, I think we should removed the POV tag from top of article. Carol Moore 22:10, 13 November 2008 (UTC)Carolmooredc

I agree and removed the sign. I hope 3 weeks was enough time to make the case to keep it there. --Gogino (talk) 03:21, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

POV Fork related to Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA).[edit]

This 'timeline' is filled with events who's relationship to the mortgage crisis is disputed, making it read like a POV fork from the main article. For example, what does the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) that "imposes heavy sanctions for financial institutions found guilty of discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, or age" have to do with a mortgage crisis in 2008? This timeline is filled with anti-poor/racist innuendo like that. This timeline should only mention events that are mentioned in the main article about the main article about the Subprime mortgage crisis otherwise it is just a POV fork. LK (talk) 08:50, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. More needs to be said about interest rate preemption and relevant bankruptcy law changes that have contributed mightily to the crisis. Also more on spread of financial derivatives.--JohnnyB256 (talk) 12:53, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, per above, I don't know what you mean by "interest rate preemption" - what law when? Something already covered in timeline??
"relevant bankruptcy law" - I assumed is Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005. Not sure of relevance. According to article: it requires payment of portion of their debts for those who can afford to. Unsourced section says "the Means Test often results in debtors more easily obtaining a discharge." So they are free to go into debt again? Please explain. Thanks. Carol Moore 13:56, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
I disagree. If financial institutions are forced to make bad mortgage loans it is obviously related to this crisis. I am not agaist reformulating it though. I also don't know how strong influence it had but presently there is no consensus about that and that is why that fact should be there for now. POV is erasing it. There might be, however, other statements that are POV. Could you copy here the other statements you had in mind? --Gogino (talk) 04:14, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Changing my mind: I agree. I didn't find any source that would claim that ECOA influenced banks to make bad decisions. What else do you have? --Gogino (talk) 05:52, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
An internet search for unlawful for any creditor to discriminate against any applicant, with respect to any aspect of a credit transaction, on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, or age comes up with so many entries from governmental - especially Federal Reserve -- sources that the only question is which one is the best. Feel free to recommend the one you like best. (The original article needs updated ref too.) This insulting section header is an incredible WP:attack on other editors and really should be removed. Carol Moore 01:41, 4 November 2008 (UTC)Carolmooredc
I changed the section title. --Gogino (talk) 05:29, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

POV fork at Subprime crisis impact timeline[edit]

  • This subsection moved from another page where not relevant

I want to point out that there appears to be a POV fork of this page at Subprime crisis impact timeline. That timeline is filled events not mentioned on this page, who's relationship to the mortgage crisis is marginal and disputed, making it read like a POV fork of this article. For example, it prominently features events like the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and the Community Reinvestment Act in the 1970's. What do those things have to do with a mortgage crisis in 2008? IMO the timeline there needs to be brought into agreement with this article, otherwise it is just a POV fork of this article. LK (talk) 08:57, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what "POV fork" is supposed to mean but that timeline needs to be shortened considerably and perhaps stripped of things that are tangential, like ECOA. I think one can make a case for the CRA, but there's no need to reach back that far or that tangentially. If "POV fork" means "mess" than I agree, as most finance stories on this website are a mess to some degree.--JohnnyB256 (talk) 20:39, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry about the jargon. Here's a wiki link to the internal Wikipedia article about point of view based content forking. LK (talk) 10:59, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. I need to educate myself about these things.--JohnnyB256 (talk) 12:30, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to say that I examined the timeline and the relevant policy statement and I agree that the timeline is a POV fork and should deleted. Thanks for bringing this to our attention.--JohnnyB256 (talk) 13:10, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This discussion must be done on the talk page for the timeline. --Gogino (talk) 04:34, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone mind if I move it there?? Carol Moore 01:43, 4 November 2008 (UTC)


Comments after moving talk section here[edit]

First, this page was created by Farcaster, who creates a lot of pages which some consider POV forks, so please be consistent and look at all the other "forks" he's created.
Second, a lot of articles have timelines, including on this topic. I would have a very good argument which I won't reveal at this time why it is far more POV to delete the article.
Third, while it does need some work to delete extraneous or overly explained info, most of the stuff in it is relevant.
Fourth, I have 4 WP:RS showing how ECOA is used to enforce CRA and just haven't gotten around to putting them in CRA or Timeline or Subprime article. Because of danged sinus condition behind on a lot of things but starting to catchup.Carol Moore 21:53, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
The main article Subprime mortgage crisis in section "Government policies" lists at least 4 WP:RS how CRA contributed to the crisis and at least 4 other WP:RS that claim that it didn't contribute. That means to choose one side would be POV and so it must be listed in the timeline at this time. Further you claim "I have 4 WP:RS showing how ECOA is used to enforce CRA", which shows that ECOA is not POV at this time either. That can change in the future after a consensus will emerge. --Gogino (talk) 03:11, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Re Second. All articles with timelines I could find were very selective. Could you list these articles so we can see if they can replace this one? --Gogino (talk) 03:36, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
First, I don't understand the comment above by Gogino. Second I made clear relation of EOAC and CRA in CRA article and here. What other alleged POV's do you see? And I also answered the Fork argument. As for Subprime mortgage crisis, that is the article that is POV because it is a haphazard compilation of WP:OR theories. It would be better served by being a much longer and detailed version of a timeline. Causality often can be found in a review of events, which is why those supporting the WP:OR at Subprime mortgage crisis would want to see this article eliminated. I think unless we come up with better evidence should get rid of that POV tag at top of article. Carol Moore 22:14, 13 November 2008 (UTC)Carolmooredc

What's needed[edit]

What's needed for this article is to detail the omitted elephant in the room: the Wall Street banks, derivatives, and their investments in subprime. I think that this timeline goes into excessive details into every hiss and pop in the regulatory sphere, while omitting sufficient details on the factors that brought this country and the world to its knees. My ability to contribute to Wiki is limited but I hope that the many who have the time can work on this timeline.--JohnnyB256 (talk) 13:59, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that this article is becoming too detailed especially starting with October 10, 2008. It makes sense to list first events worldwide but not for each country since there are hundreds of countries out there. However, if somebody wants to start a page for a specific country that is okay I think. The most important events that should not be erased are those that possibly deepened, accelerated, or caused this crisis. Unfortunately, there is currently no consensus on this and it is better being listed until there is a sourced consensus. --Gogino (talk) 05:16, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Let's start the cleaning of what we all can agree on. Then we can discuss the rest.
I would erase October 14 all except "The US taps ..."; October 13 all except "The UK government ..." and except "The European Central Bank ...";
October 10 all; October 7: "Bank of America ..."; October 6: "Iceland ..."; October 6: "The Danish government ..."; October 6: "Bank of America agrees ...";
--Gogino (talk) 05:33, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I did the cleaning as I said. What else to clean? --Gogino (talk) 03:31, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I hate to be a killjoy, but there are some good reasons to worry that, unfortunately, we may not actually be in a 'normalization' stage as suggested in the section above "Putting an ending date on this?". We have yet to see any firm signs that policy tools will or are actually working, and there are reasons to believe housing prices could continue to fall. Let me be clear, I am hopeful, and to some degree even optimistic that a fresh look from new blood at Treasury, and better global central bank coordination, might at least be able to break the downward cycle. If that's the case I would be thrilled to see that, in fact, the timeline should end. We just may not be quite there yet...99.163.42.132 (talk) 14:27, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I cleaned out some more redundant or excessive stuff and added a few important things that had been left out, including EOAC/CRA enforcement, which I also added to CRA article and assume there will be a brouhaha over that!
As for when this ends, I think it depends on how much subprime problems continue to cause other problems, like if govt is now buying up a bunch of bad subprime loans and mortgages, and if strenuous application of CRA and big Fannie/Freddie loans keep causing problems. Frankly I haven't been paying sufficient attention since back to my main concerns, war and peace. But this is relevant so I should bone up and add whatever needed if no one beats me to it.
Also, unless someone explains better why this mere listing of events is POV, without even making suggestions on how to make it less so, I think we should removed the POV tag from top of article. Carol Moore 22:10, 13 November 2008 (UTC)Carolmooredc
The original complaint seems to have been that it emphasized some aspects of the crisis and not others. There is still not enough on the banks, and their crucial role.--JohnnyB256 (talk) 20:35, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I went through Subprime mortgage crisis‎ and several related other articles looking for dated/event info only since it is a timeline. Obviously it's harder to find things like Such&Such bank decides to invest 30% of assets in subprime mortgages, etc. There is some general mostly sourced info on trends in the article now at beginning of sections which could be expanded somewhat. And there could be more info showing how various laws led banks, etc. to engage in various behaviors. Will add some stuff when get a chance, unless someone beats me to it :-) Carol Moore 20:48, 14 November 2008 (UTC)Carolmooredc
Yeah, hard to chronicle what regulators DIDN'T do. For instance the SEC essentially shut its office supervising the big banks. That came out in an AG report I think, which is on the net somewhere.--JohnnyB256 (talk) 20:51, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think I noticed that in timeline currently. A lot of good stuff was added by drive by anon IPs and other editors. (But speaking of undone/unmentioned things, there's the whole missing issue of "Protective" govt regulation as a scam to lull silly masses into thinking state-managed capitalism and investing is safe. Or the govt-trumped up fees of attorneys and accountants also make it difficult for average people to get good affordable financial and legal advice in all these matters, but that probably won't make it in either.) Carol Moore 21:02, 14 November 2008 (UTC)Carolmooredc
Is that in the timeline? I can't seem to find it, but my eyes are not what they used to be.--JohnnyB256 (talk) 22:37, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think this timeline also needs to connect in some of the entries that don't seem visibly tied to the crisis. For instance, you have the CRA, and you can say that the CRA was cited by some commentators as leading to the crisis, though that is in dispute.--JohnnyB256 (talk) 21:28, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CRA is there (1977, 1995, 1997). How would you like to "connect" it? --Gogino (talk) 02:38, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

<---Indent I agree but would rather do in systematic fashion, but not today :-) Go for it. Carol Moore 16:17, 18 November 2008 (UTC)Carolmooredc

What do you think about discussions in Washington in which Democrats are on record denying there is a problem with Fannie and Freddie? (2004) [2] Brian Pearson (talk) 03:47, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Alluded to in Sept 2003 entry... Carol Moore 13:48, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
I went through the main article again and threw in a bunchy of stuff about "Wall Street banks, derivatives, and their investments in subprime." Anything else that article missed? CarolMooreDC (talk) 16:09, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Marquette decision[edit]

The timeline should include the Marquette Bank Supreme Court decision of 1978.drh (talk) 23:30, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no move per discussion below. No disambiguation is needed in this case. - GTBacchus(talk) 04:55, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Subprime crisis impact timeline → US subprime crisis impact timeline — This article needs to be moved because it is only about the US subprime crisis and nowhere else. The title of the article should reflect is contents as accurately as reasonably possible. Eyreland (talk) 08:51, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What other subprime crisis is this change supposed to distinguish the article from? Septentrionalis PMAnderson 02:25, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Government Garantees[edit]

This article fails to mention the garantees that the US and European governments give to the banks. Which now means that this goverments are now on the hook for the trillions of dollars of potential losses in the financial sector. Not to mention the unknow amount of potential derivatives losses of the banks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.21.214.42 (talk) 16:57, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

you can add information, just find a reliable book or newspaper article and summarize it and reference it. Decora (talk) 14:28, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

new name needed?[edit]

The financial crisis included subprime mortgage securities (which contained a lot of refinancings and home equity lines of credit, not real mortgages), but it also included CLOs which were stuffed with leveraged buyout junk bonds, and most of all, the Synthetic CDO market, which some have described as a 'ponzi scheme' and 'gambling' (whether it was gambling on mortgages, which were mostly refinancings, or on other Synthetic CDOs). So, essentially, if a vast portion of the market is basically people gambling on home equity lines of credit and refinancings, is it really accurate to just call it 'subprime crisis'? IMHO i feel it is better to call it a financial crisis timeline but i guess its not a huge deal. Decora (talk) 14:28, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

...


sorry, deleting double insertion ... now you see why I don't "be bold" ?


ps: assume good faith , )


Avaiki (talk) 02:13, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]


... I ended up on this explanation page "accidentally" when I was looking for a different Timeline, but,,, While it seems that interest in this page has clearly waned - last update Dec 2012, I am in total agreement that the title of this page - and its emphasis needs to change. We have known since 2010 that "sub-prime" mortgages were the least of the Economy's worries and that it was "Wall St"'s and "the City"'s (London's version of Wall St.) gambleholism that Crashed the World Economies, not CA or FL "house flippers", nor Homer Homeowner, nor Countrywide nor WaMu. These, and others, were merely convenient whipping boys to transfer 'Blame' to.

1. Wild enthusiasm: The build-up of the Economy so began, as any project, with Tax Cuts, Repeal of Glass-Steagall, De-Regulation of Wall St & the Big Banks, running 2 wars 'on the cuff', and concentrating Wealth. Greed took over common sense.

2. Disillusionment: The Recession of 2006 actually began in 2005-6 when Mega-Builders realized they had grossly over-built for the actual Housing Market, and began laying off tens of thousands of contract construction workers and contractors. To secure a reliable pool of construction workers, Mega-Builders had given them "sweetheart" home deals, and with all the "easy money" construction workers bought new trucks and cars. As contract workers, their incomes disappeared. In short order, they were defaulting on their sweetheart mortgages and vehicle loans, etc. Yes, this gave the Financial World pause to reflect on what they had been doing. With the confidence called into question, a bubble on a bubble started to deflate. But, all of the troubled mortgages ("sub-prime" to anyone in the mortgage industry, knows does not mean "questionable"). All of the truly "troubled mortgages" at this stage only amounted to a few hundred $Ms, not even a pin prick. But, no one did anything about the situation. "A stitch in Time saves nine."

3 Confusion: The Great Recession began in June 2007 with the beginnings of the Bear Stearns implosion amidst the collapse of several mortgage "banks". Hedge Funds and Dirty-handed Merrill Lynch exacerbated the predicament of Bear Stearns. The dominoes were falling, but barely because of "sub-prime mortgages", but because of jobs - crude oil speculation. As Mega-Builders stopped ordering materials and construction workers lost their jobs, other related businesses, even to utility providers, began their round of lay-offs. As gasoline prices climbed from $2/gal in Winter '06 to over $4/gal in Summer '08, the Un-Employed could no longer afford to gas up to search for non-existent jobs. Plus all kinds of businesses with a significant fuel/delivery expense began retrenching. (see the 60 Minutes segment on Oil Speculation for whom to blame.)

4. Panic: The Depression, yes, the Recession of 2007 really turned into a Depression in Summer '08. Gasoline prices became the final straw. Then, began the Financial Panic of '08, which begat the Great Depression of '08 in November. As of May/June '08, "troubled mortgages" amounted to $30 to $50B (per a former 'C level' at JPMC), not even a significant fraction of the $22T that Wall St, et al. had over-leveraged the "financial system" with their CDOs, etc. (read Gambling chits) by November '08.

Then, came the Bush Admin's failed "Bail-out" helping the Perps instead of the Victims. Banking dried up to the point that 100+ year old thriving businesses went under for lack of line of credit loans not being renewed to floor inventory. Detroit's "Big 2 out of 3" almost went under for similar reasons, not for the BS reasons that came out of Congress and the lazy Media.

The only differences between the Great Depression of '32 and of '08 were: FUI, SS/MediCare, SNAP, FDIC and MedicAid. Food banks and soup kitchens prevented the bread lines of '29-'34.

While the initial impact of the Un-Employment of tens of thousands of Construction-related Workers had rippling negative Economic Impact, "sub-prime mortgages" had little to do with the expanding Crises. And, generally, the standard rules of a project applied at the end: 5. Search for the guilty. 6. Punishment of the innocent. 7. Promotion of non-participants.

IF some non-partisan individual takes it upon himself to re-write this Topic, he/she should begin with viewing "Inside Job", "Capitalism: A Love Story" and the other related movies recommended by MarketPlace. http://www.marketplace.org/topics/business/economy-40/top-five-films-financial-crisis — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tgsherer (talk • contribs) 15:43, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

draft head para adds[edit]

...

SUGGESTED DRAFT > NEW FIRST AND THIRD PARAS

In the interests of moving editing forward, may I suggest a draft first and third paragraph to ease readers into the subject, with a little more context? I am afraid I will have to leave any linking to others more Wikipedia proficient. But this may serve as a framework for answering concerns raised by the editors about the neutrality of the article.


DRAFT FIRST AND THIRD PARAS

Acceptance of the term Global Financial Crisis, over other references like Global Finance Crisis, marks an early adaptation by markets and communities to worldwide recession. Evolving debate centres on immediate events leading up to the crises, and, increasingly, potential historic causes of this and earlier recessions and depressions.

[SECOND PARA .... as existing]

Contention and controversy surround causes of the GFC, public debate deeply riven by accusations of ideology. Concerns range from legislative process to pandemic corruption. Regardless of agenda, long-term timelines show a quickening pattern of economic collapse and regrowth, with more frequent meltdowns and escalating losses.

Dunno if that really helps, but might at least form a kick-off point.

jas

Avaiki (talk) 02:07, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

...

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Subprime crisis impact timeline. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 06:21, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Subprime crisis impact timeline. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:05, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Subprime crisis impact timeline. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:16, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Subprime crisis impact timeline. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:02, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Subprime_crisis_impact_timeline&oldid=1208365063"