Talk:Rent-to-own

NPOV Problem
The article, in its original form, presents a viewpoint heavily biased against the RTO industry, as well as some patently incorrect statements. My revision of the article corects these errors. Whomever is constantly reverting to original, the bias of the original article is wholly inappropriate. 71.127.170.30 (talk) 09:16, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Removal of sourced content with unsource essay, is Vandalism.--Hu12 (talk) 09:43, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Which statements are "unsourced"? The information I have presented is in the original sources in the article. You cannot revert based on your preference of the original, biased edition over my equally-sourced edit which provides information from both sides. You seem to believe "vandalism" is defined as "removal of bias I like". 71.127.170.30 (talk) 19:31, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Your content is completely unsourced; your only external link is an industry home page in the external links section. Flowanda | Talk 21:00, 20 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and the correct version of any article is the "Verifiable" version cited with ”Reliable sources”. I do find it concerning that this anon claims wiping out "7" sources with this unsourced content is considered by hm/her "equally-sourced". --Hu12 (talk) 21:21, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

I would be more than happy to rewrite and put the sources back in. However, Hu12 (who, through a staggering conflict of interest, is enforcing his own personal viewpoint on the grounds of defending "neutrality"- see my talk page) has prohibited me from making any further edits to the page. I do believe this should be kicked up to higher authority (we'll see if that actually happens). 71.127.170.30 (talk) 01:00, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * This case seems to be an attempt to impose one's own view of "standards to apply" rather than those of the community. Wikipedia policy is quite clear here: the responsibility for justifying inclusion of any content rests firmly with the editor seeking to include it. Your deletion of "Verifiable" content cited with ”Reliable sources”  is because you don't like it, then lie to editors here that what you added was "equally-sourced"?. Does This edit seem familiar.
 * See also - Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard/Archive_23
 * Accounts     --Hu12 (talk) 02:00, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

External link to APRO
I added a link to the Association of Progressive Rental Organizations, the trade association of the RTO industry. It was then removed by Flowanda, and I forgot I ever added it, so I added it again. Flowanda then removed it again. Anyway, bottom line: Isn’t a link to the industry’s trade association justifiable? Looking at WP:EL, I see nothing prohibiting such a link. I think it would help address the concerns of those who are claiming that the article is biased against the industry. What specific guideline are you claiming it would be in violation of, Flowanda?

Regards,

Wulf (talk) 10:41, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Realy serves no purpose, unless its used as a citation (which it is), therefore is uneeded in EL section. --Hu12 (talk) 19:17, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Good source
Here's a government survey on the RTO industry Uwmad (talk) 17:42, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I came across that before. The problem is that it’s from 1999. I imagine the industry has changed quite a lot since then. It looks like there’s a serious lack of unbiased research in the area. —Wulf (talk) 02:08, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Drifting back toward fluff

 * I just restored the DOD stuff.

Calamitybrook (talk) 16:58, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Minor reorganization, MOS cleanup suggested -- thoughts?
After taking a look at this article, I’ve taken a stab at a minor reorganization to bring it closer in line with the manual of style. As my employer has existing clients within the industry that is the subject of this article, no direct edits have been made as of yet. Instead, per conflict of interest guidelines, the suggested update is here in my sandbox. Can others take a look, and provide input on this sandboxed version in order to establish consensus? Cheers, Jeff Bedford (talk) 19:49, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I've started comparing the two versions. For others who may also be wanting to add comments, here's a dif between the current article and the proposed draft. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 19:37, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Based on input and discussions on Barek's user Talk page, the edits proposed above have since been reflected in the article. Inquiries for feedback were also posted to the Wikiproject Business and Wikiproject Finance. While no response to those Wikiproject posts has been received at this point, Wikipedia is a work in progress, and further input, changes or feedback of any kind is still helpful and appreciated. If others identify changes that would better align this article with Wikipedia's style guidelines, do make those changes directly, or, where it would be beneficial, follow up below for the purpose of discussion. Cheers, Jeff Bedford (talk) 15:32, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Rent-to-own. 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:
 * Added tag to http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=1552001591145721228&q=rent-to-own&hl=en&as_sdt=10000000000002
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111018124500/http://www.defense.gov/pubs/pdfs/Report_to_Congress_final.pdf to http://www.defense.gov/pubs/pdfs/Report_to_Congress_final.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100713082432/http://doj.nh.gov/consumer/sourcebook/rent_own.html to http://doj.nh.gov/consumer/sourcebook/rent_own.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:15, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Rent-to-own. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131217003857/http://www.rtohq.org/about-rent-to-own/ to http://www.rtohq.org/about-rent-to-own/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080708213611/http://www.brookings.edu/reports/2006/07poverty_fellowes.aspx to http://www.brookings.edu/reports/2006/07poverty_fellowes.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:36, 20 January 2018 (UTC)