Talk:USA Living

Promotional Edits/Reverts

This page seems currently be "Reputation Managed" due to a recent investigative article about their business practices. This is unfortunately looks like it is turning into an edit war and should be resolved here on the talk page instead.

Before the ProPublica/Washington Post article, this company's page did not exist.

The USA Discounters page is currently being edited to:

 1) Replace the name of the company's President with a Vice-President possibly in the company 
     (Pres. is sourced with BBB, Vice-Pres. is unsourced). Why not add the VP along with a citation?
      More accurate representation - the Vice President cited is the senior officer at the company. 
      The BBB record is out of date - from 2000.      
 2) Add an unsourced paragraph with PR/advertising puffery. May have valid info, 
     but references aren't cited and uses promotional/advertising/peacock language.
     Without the language and with sources, this is information could be good for this entry. 
 3) Change ==Controversy== section to ==Recent News==.
     Recent news is a more appropriate title and provides means for on-going updates
 4) Change "Credit and Retail" to "Retail". The USA Discounters website tagline 
     is "Your Incredible Credit Store". Not sure why this is being removed.

Stesmo (talk) 19:10, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Looks like this was set up solely as a gripe page. We are NOT removing the controversy; we just have the right to explain what we are and what we do, before we get into that section. Can we please agree on that? (Added by Eabct1961)

Eabct1961: Wikipedia isn't a gripe page, discussion page or a brochure for a company, it's an encyclopedia.

Anyone can add information that meets Wikipedia's criteria. But, the information you're adding isn't neutral (you are trying to promote your company and/or do damage control), potentially has Conflict of Interest (COI) and/or isn't said in a neutral voice. You aren't adding footnotes that cite reliable references for the facts that could/should stay around (number of stores, etc.). The current page includes not only a short sentence about the current controversy, but a sentence that briefly mentions the one of company's refutations. Both point to references where people can read more. Check out WP:PROMOTION (section 5. Advertising, marketing or public relations), WP:Reliable and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view for more info on editing Wikipedia. Also, you should look at the Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide page about editing Wikipedia and Conflict of Interest (COI).

(You can reply to my message by just typing below and include 4 ~ characters in a row to 'sign' your statement at the end. Thanks for taking this to the Talk page!) Stesmo (talk) 20:13, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

1) More accurate representation - the Vice President cited is the senior officer at the company. The BBB record is out of date - from 2000.

2) The information provided was straight-forward explanation - not puffery - that explain the type of business. The sources listed state much of the information.

3) Recent news is a more appropriate title and provides means for on-going updates

4) Census.gov categories businesses and the classification for this business is Retail Trade, most commonly shortened to "Retail".

   Most retailers also offer credit to their customers, like Target, and they are also classified as Retail. Unsigned comments made by mktexp

mktexp

1. Facts without sources don't survive on wikipedia. If that BBB record is out of date, provide a up-to-date citation from a reliable, published, third-party source with the correct facts. You are assuming that BBB records meet this standard? reliable? No dispute that Norman Sloan is listed on the 2000 BBB update. The issue using an out of date source and information is that it is out of date. The Propublica article and published materials all reference VP Timothy W. Dorsey. No other current management representative is referenced. {{Mktexp (talk) 04:23, 1 August 2014 (UTC)mktexp}}

And, why would you mention a vice-president without the president? VP Timothy W. Dorsey is referenced as as he is the only officer of the company identified and verified as a current officer of the company. This is an up to date citation from a published, third party source. {{Mktexp (talk) 04:23, 1 August 2014 (UTC)mktexp}} If the VP is notable enough to be mentioned, then the President should be as well. Is there a President? That would be a question for the company to respond to. I am only citing information from Ref 2-4 {{Mktexp (talk) 04:23, 1 August 2014 (UTC)mktexp}}

1. What part of the BBB reference footnoted points out how many stores and locations? Cite a reference for your data. The referenced Propublica article identifies "31 stores, 7 stand-alone Fletcher's stores". {{Mktexp (talk) 04:23, 1 August 2014 (UTC)mktexp}} The original Talk was discussing the original language of Eabct1961, which used puffery (proud, helps, quality). As I mentioned earlier, this information could be helpful with sources and without promotional language. You've removed some of the puffery, remove more and add a source.
2. Separate from the company employee changes trying to manage their PR hit (this is presumptuous {{Mktexp (talk) 04:23, 1 August 2014 (UTC)mktexp}}, this seems worth discussing. However, this is one of many pages with a Controversy section and you seem bent on only changing this one. Do you believe the current kerfuffle isn't controversial for USA Discounters? If this page isn't updated in a year's time, the ProPublica article will still be a controversy, but it won't be Recent News.

News: a) new information or a report about something that has happened recently; b) information that is reported in a newspaper, magazine, television news program, etc. (Merriam-Webster) {{Mktexp (talk) 04:23, 1 August 2014 (UTC)mktexp}}

1. The USA Discounters [[1]] tagline is "Your Incredible Credit Store". If it was pejorative to mention that they are a Credit company, I'm pretty sure a large portion of their own website wouldn't be discuss it if it was. However, I concede your point and agree it should stay Retail.

Stesmo (talk) 18:12, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

It is really difficult to sense the conversation when you make edits inside of my comments.

1. There is a source that points out the name of the President. You have no source that says there is no President or that the VP Dorsey is the senior officer. That is inside-the-company information, if true, which points to a COI on your part. Dorsey, along with others, is an officer of the company, as stated in sources. The problem isn't that Dorsey is added, it is that the President is removed. <edit: Just checked sources again and BBB entry for USA Discounters no longer lists a President Norman Slone (or Dorsey)>
2. It is not presumptuous to state that someone from the company is trying to manage their PR hit. Eabct1961 has said that he/she has a "right to explain what we are and what we do".
3. The definition of News, Controversy and other words are known and used in the proper fashion here. If this page isn't edited in a year, the ProPublica article will still be something controversial, but it will no longer be ==Recent News==.

Stesmo (talk) 17:32, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Notability

This appears to be an attack page created about a non notable company. Theroadislong (talk) 21:50, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

@Theroadislong: That is incorrect. This is an encyclopedic page about a company that made headlines and is part of United States's economic and legal history. This company apparently has been subject to numerous investigations. That is fact, not attack. The fact that they are infamous instead of famous does not make them any less notable by WP standards nor does it trigger any sort of bias or POV issue if the only thing they are notable for is their alleged bad behavior. This page is just facts, sourced and documented for the encyclopedia. If more facts from reliable third party sources can be found then by all means they should be added to the article.

Do you consider Mossack Fonseca an "attack page"? It is not much larger than this page, and its description and history sections are even smaller than this one, yet that article has a much larger controversy section and very little else for much the same reasons as this one, they never did anything famous until they were caught doing something wrong. Koala Tea Of Mercy (KTOM's Articulations & Invigilations) 02:03, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on USA Living. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.mnat.com/files/BankruptcyAlerts/FirstDayDeclaration_08-24-15_USADiscountersLtd.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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 II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:10, 10 April 2016 (UTC)