Talk:Keefe, Bruyette & Woods

Fair use rationale for Image:Kbw logo.gif
Image:Kbw logo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 08:15, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Keefe, Bruyette & Woods
why this short article is of questionable neutrality?

Lamro (talk) 18:08, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

I came here to read about the James McDermott insider trading scandal. . . . . and nothing here. Nothing at all. Zip. Zilch. Stink. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.154.6.52 (talk) 08:50, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Removed Controversy Section
The only content under the controversy section was from 1999--twenty+ years ago. The only source for the section was a permanently dead link. The controversy was also apparently inconsequential: it said the firm paid $75,000 to resolve it, which is a really small sum of money for these firms. Two sentences isn't enough to justify an entire subsection, and the particular event isn't notable enough to be included in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ImVeryAwesome (talk • contribs) 01:49, 27 March 2019 (UTC)