Talk:Stock selection criterion

Quantitative Cumulative Value Analysis

The "Discounted Cash Flow Model" described in this section is inconsistent with the more correct description in the article entitled "Stock Valuation" [[1]]...which essentially states that a stock's value is derived from the discounted expected future cash flows to the investor (ie. dividends and the ultimate proceeds from sale). Alakel (talk) 12:57, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Chakresh-ji, I removed a dead web link for shiatustreet.com. Once I removed the link I found that the sentence it was attached to didn't make much sense either so I removed it: "Some of these approaches can be automated in the form of automated screens." I'm sure you had some valuable point in mind so please feel free to repost this sentence along with a word or two describing what an automated screen is and also a web link reference if you have one. Thanks so much for your help. You did a great job on this article. --Keithbob (talk) 21:33, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Chakresh, I found a sentence in a subsection of the article and used it to recreate the sentence mentioned above. I hope you like it. If not please change it so that it pleases you. --Keithbob (talk) 22:22, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

References

Editing to comply with WP:NOTHOWTO

Chakresh-ji, You have created another really good article. However, as was mentioned by Mendaliv on the Stock Market Bottom article (discussion page), we have to be careful not to violate the Wiki WP:NOTHOWTO policy which forbids articles that tell a person how to do something. We want to be especially careful with articles on investing. We wouldn't want someone to construe your articles as investment advice or guidelines. So I am going through and adding a word here or there to qualify the statements, letting the reader know that these are just general pricipals and that they may vary depending on the circumstances of the market, the investor, the stock, the timing etc. I'm sure you would agree with this, yes? When I go through and edit I always try to maintain the integrity of the article as you intended, whenever possible. If I am stepping on any toes or you disagree please let me know. I want to work together with you on this. OK? Best Wishes, Keithbob--Keithbob (talk) 21:50, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Robotic trading

Does anyone know of a page that talks about automatic/robotic traders? I'm seeking info on this, but can't seem to form the correct search parameters. Of course, I'm assuming a page about this exists at all.... --Kickstart70TC 19:26, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia's Manual of Style

Please: WP:MOS exists. Really, it does. See this edit. Michael Hardy (talk) 14:12, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Nominate for Deletion or Merger?

I have serious doubts about this article. The article topic does not appear to me a scholarly and/or definable term and appears not to pass WP:NOTABILITY and to violate WP:HOWTO and WP:COATRACK. I think the info it contains could/should be merged with other articles or deleted. What do others think?-- — Keithbob • Talk • 17:24, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Appears to me that the references included and general outline of the topic since this concern was raised have clarified notability enough that the notice should be removed. Do we have consensus? --Kickstart70TC 18:33, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

It seems reasonable that this article remains, based on my review today. I am not an expert in the area, but it has assisted with my research on a related topic and the article appears to meet Wikipedia standards in terms of referencing, layout, detail, and tone. Is there any progress on this, as it would be good to remove the notability tag that was placed there over two years ago and I am more than happy to take action, if there isn't anything further.--Soulparadox (talk) 01:22, 12 December 2012 (UTC)