Talk:Bank of United States/Archives/2013

Discussion on title.
We can discuss the title here. Please include you comments in the various sections below and feel free to add other titles. (Remember, this is not a vote, so please provide some reasoning!):

Bank of United States

 * Weak support This was the name of the bank and the bank is important because it was the first major bank failure of the Great Depression (before this bank failed, failures were mostly limited to small regional banks and agricultural banks). The con is the similarity of the name with "Bank of the United States", of which there are many (First Bank of the US, Second Bank of the US, EXIM bank of the US, etc.). Still, I think that the pros marginally outweigh the cons because of the missing article. --Regent's Park (Rose Garden) 15:30, 10 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Strong support. God forbid we actually give the article the same name as the bank! Again, the name is Bank of United States, not Bank of the United States. There were no other historically significant banks with an identical name. There are no banks on the Bank of the United States disambiguation page with an identical name. This bank is not some historically insignificant bank either. It played a very major role in the worsening of the Great Depression. Finally, there is an otheruses template at the top of the article correcting anyone who arrives at this article when they are actually searching for Bank of the United States. --JHP (talk) 06:02, 11 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I believe that use of this title is supported by WP:PRIMARYTOPIC: "Any article which has primary usage for its title and has other uses should have a disambiguation link at the top, and the disambiguation page should link back to the primary topic." This article is the primary usage for "Bank of United States" because no other historically significant bank has had an identical title. Let me also point out that Cure and The Cure are separate articles, even though the only difference between them is the word "the". Neither of them is a disambiguation page because "Cure" and "The Cure" are both primary topics for their respective title. Disambiguation is done by another article named Cure (disambiguation). When it comes to article naming, we shouldn't just wing it. Arguments for or against the current name should be based on Wikipedia policies and guidelines, especially WP:NAME and WP:DISAMBIG. (WP:PRIMARYTOPIC is part of WP:DISAMBIG.) --JHP (talk) 03:44, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Bank of United States (New York)

 * Support. We are not required to disambiguate for a difference of a the, but it's probably safer to do so. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 06:30, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * The problem I have with this version is that, technically, we should say Bank of United States (New York bank), which is heading into cumbersome territory. Parenthesis qualifiers are usually locational for physical objects or places (as in Pennsylvania Station (New York City)) or identify the type of 'thing' for non-physical objects (as in New York (magazine)). --Regent's Park (Rose Garden) 16:16, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Parenthetical qualifiers are whatever is needed to make clear which meaning we are using; since they are used only when necessary, there can be no pattern for them. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 18:24, 12 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Oppose. Use of parentheses in article titles is covered by WP:NCDAB, option 2. Use of this suggested title is in conflict with that guideline. --JHP (talk) 03:57, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Bank of United States (private bank)

 * Strongly Oppose. I suspect this is a misuse of the term "private bank". I would want to know that Bank of United States was actually a private bank, rather than a commercial bank or a savings bank, before agreeing to this title. Calling it a private bank may also lead to confusion with the term private banking, because in much modern usage "private banks" cater to the wealthy. --JHP (talk) 05:47, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't like this title much either but the Bank of United States had an investment banking arm (Bankus), so it was a bit more than a commercial bank. --Regent's Park (Rose Garden) 15:57, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * That's still different than being a private bank or a private bank. --JHP (talk) 02:39, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Excuse me gents, but why does the intro to this article say three times that the bank failed in 1931, when the article itself says the bank failed in December 1930? (NB: the bank failed in December 1930 and NOT 1931) Also it says "The bank run on its Bronx branch is said to have started the collapse of banking during the Great Depression." Why "is said"? Maybe it "is said," but it's not true. The collapse of the Caldwell chain of banks in Tennessee, followed by the failure of the National Bank of Kentucky--the largest bank in Kentucky--all occurred in November 1930. Those failures were more momentous because of the numbers of banks brought down (157), even if the amount of deposits ($190 million) was less than in the Bank of U.S. see: Robert Lynn Fuller, "Phantom of Fear" the Banking Panic of 1933 pp. 16-18. Panic1933 (talk) 20:00, 21 July 2013 (UTC)