Talk:SBA 504 Loan

Business Low‑importance

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Finance & Investment Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Finance & Investment, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Finance and Investment on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Finance & InvestmentWikipedia:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentTemplate:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentFinance & Investment articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Government Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government (assessed as Low-importance).

Untitled[edit]

Why was my recent edit undone? It had no spam whatsoever... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.82.161.66 (talk) 20:33, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

it was undone because it was done by you a person with a COI, in order to hide the fact that the program is easy to navigate. Abductive (reasoning) 20:38, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Your 'edits' consist in a wholesale replacement of the article with a different version and you have called them yourself elsehwere aptly 'posts'. They remove the secondary sources that motivate us to have an article in the first place as this is not a How-To as well as carelessly and repeatedly the categories. Please tread carefully and start to edit instead of post, building on what is already there. E.g if there are out dated numbers, that actually means that they have changed over time which can of course been addressed in an explicit way. (The current versions have no dates at all, not even when the program was started.) I'll make one attempt at integrating the versions as Abduct's is certainly a valid stub that can still be the lede even if we choose to add more detail.--Tikiwont (talk) 19:23, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay i mostly added the stuff up, changed a section header, removed a sentence and added some date questions, so this is not to take a position that all current content should stay inside. In particular I've doubts about the Structure section. Rather its is supposed to be a starting point from which we can continue to edit, hopefully without anybody getting blocked for edit warring. --Tikiwont (talk) 19:46, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Too technical[edit]

Whoever added the warning that the article is "too technical" or "lacks a coherent topic" is just wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.47.228.216 (talk) 20:21, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed -- the article is not "too technical" nor lacking in coherence. It reads well as it is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.125.235.186 (talk) 19:22, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed again—I found the article useful and not overly technical in my understanding of both USA-defined 'small businesses' and in how one might be financed. Eugen Hamerle (talk) 19:32, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]