Talk:Numismatic Guaranty Company

Controversies Section
The controversy section here (as well as the one at PCGS) is pure crap. Obviously there's going to be rivalries within the coin collecting niche, but putting together every little negative detail about a company (such as a Coin World article comparing the grading agencies from 2003) seems a bit much to me. Hanxu9 (talk) 14:11, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

removing POV tag with no active discussion per Template:POV
I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
 * This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
 * There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
 * It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
 * In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.

Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 18:53, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Please adhere to Wiki policies
Many recent edits to the NGC article have blatantly violated Wikipedia's rules. Kindly note that Wiki is not a free advertising site WP:PROMOTION; a place to list trivial and non-notable facts, such as NGC holder improvements or info about any of thousands of major collections it has certified WP:ORG; nor a site to include other non-encyclopedic info, such as when it certified its 10 millionth coin or what any of millions of NGC coins have sold for at auction WP:NOT. Also, all entries must be properly linked to verifiable sources and not include opinions. For instance, the blanket claim that "certification does not determine value" is absurdly false and directly debunked by the linked sources. In addition, all info must be written in a short, concise, encyclopedic manner WP:WBA, such as using a formal tone WP:COLLOQUIAL.--R&#38;BpopROCK (talk) 12:57, 15 July 2016 (UTC)