Talk:Financial astrology/Archives/2012

Censors please tell us, what part of this information is "not fact" or "not verified"

 * In fact, many people view financial astrology and technical analysis as the part and parcel. According to Arch Crawford, perhaps the most noted Financial Astrologer of the modern era: "So, it seems to me from our own definitions, that if one is running statistical comparisons on Stars, or Solar Flux, or SuperBowl Games, with stock market trading & price output data, it's still technical analysis of markets." [Thursday, March 06, 2003 7:37 PM, MTList Archives, http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/MTList/message/3785].


 * More evidence of this connection between financial astrology and technical analysis, can be found in the 1998 Dow Award, which is considered the most important recognition in the field of technical analysis, which was given to a paper which shows fibonacci time relationships with the lunar cycles between major market tops and bottoms, including a discussion of the impact of "full moons." https://www.mta.org/eweb/docs/1998DowAward.pdf —Preceding unsigned comment added by Happytech (talk • contribs)

Please read and understand the Wikipedia policies WP:EL, WP:RS, WP:TALK, WP:CIVIL and WP:SYN, and don't come back until you do, since the answer would be obvious if you had read the policies. THF 13:01, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

HELP
Which part of the below paragraph is not verifiable, not relevant, or not true? Are you claiming this is "orginal research?" I did not make this stuff up. Help.

Evidence of the connection between financial astrology and technical analysis, can be found in the 1998 Dow Award, which is considered the most important recognition in the field of technical analysis, which was given to a paper which shows fibonacci time relationships with the lunar cycles between major market tops and bottoms, including a discussion of the impact of "full moons." https://www.mta.org/eweb/docs/1998DowAward.pdf

70.156.182.52 18:45, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

D Burton
WP:Conflict_of_interest appears to apply here - see e.g..

Reverting Pleclech 21:14, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Seek-it Publishing
I've removed all the books by Merriman, published by Seek-it Publishing. The publisher appears to be essentially unknown. See here The place to discuss this is WP:RSN, where I'll put a notice. Please don't revert me again, discuss it there. Smallbones (talk) 04:38, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

WP:BOOKSPAM
See the above for why we don't want these books in the article. Also check out WP:MOS for a guide to "Further Reading" and similar sections. It stresses "reliable publishers" "fact checking" and similar ideas. I didn't see any of that in the list of books, so have deleted them all. You should have seen this coming! Smallbones (talk) 01:04, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

The practice of financial astrology carries the implicit belief that astrology is valid and influences human behavior.
I believe it is incorrect. One might practice or study financial astrology but not believe that astrology is valid. I may want to take a market view based on an astrological fact but it does not necessarily means I believe in Astrology at all. The fact that I think other people do believe in consequences of this astronomical event may be enough to justify my action. In other terms, it's not because a company is doing well that its stock will go up or conversely when a stock goes down, it does not always implies the company is doing bad... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.193.63.232 (talk) 10:14, 8 November 2011 (UTC)