Talk:Tellus (app)

Did you know nomination

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that even though California-based company Tellus does not possess a banking license, it offers non-FDIC-insured interest-bearing demand deposit accounts to consumers? Source: Barron's 1
  • ALT1: ... that 68% of funds lent by Tellus between April and December 2023 were given to affiliates of one real estate investment firm to invest in Silicon Valley housing? Source: Barron's 2
  • ALT2: ... that California-based startup Tellus pivoted from being a property management app to a consumer-facing financial services company? Source: Barron's 1
  • ALT3: ... that while Tellus packages together cash from multiple consumer depositors to make real estate loans, and is not FDIC-insured, it states that it does not offer mortgage-backed securities to consumers? Source: TechCrunch
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Cherry on Top (Bini song) Template:Did you know nominations/Dithapelo Keorapetse
  • Comment: QPQs completed.

Created by Red-tailed hawk (talk). Number of QPQs required: 2. DYK is currently in unreviewed backlog mode and nominator has 24 past nominations.

— Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 06:38, 1 December 2024 (UTC).

• This is not a review but rather than a comment, but ALT0 and ALT3 will probably have to be rejected due to both WP:DYKINT concerns (reliance on specialist terms that may not be easily understood by non-financial savvy readers, especially outside the US) and for also sounding rather promotional. ALT2 might be the only suitable option at this point. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:44, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

  I understand how one could read Alt0 to be promotional (though I disagree and don’t see why non-insured demand deposit accounts are appealing but for their higher rates, which isn’t in the hook). But I’m really not sure how Alt3 could be seen that way—it’s highlighting that they don't purport to offer mortgage-backed securities even though they make what appears (to at least some professors cited in the body) be some sort of securitized loan offering without registration. That being said, I do take your point that people who don’t know much about managing their finances through investment could find these two hooks’ nuances hard to understand.

  Separately, I had been considering a book about the mysterious non-existent partnerships with banks that are mentioned in the article and were the subject of Senate scrutiny, but I couldn’t figure out a way to write it concisely in hook form without oversimplifying. I’ll take a crack at that over the next couple days with a clear head. — Red-tailed sock _{(Red-tailed hawk's nest)} 16:10, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

• I shall review this. Storye book (talk) 13:38, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Thank you for this carefully-detailed article about financial wheeler-dealing. Contrary to above comments, it would seem to me that any intelligent person can smell he stink emanating from that dodgy company, no matter what country they are in. So well done for alerting us to it, and well done for writing hooks which may guide readers to take a good look at the article. I could tell from the hooks alone that there was something very unsafe about the company's handliing of money, so I would certainly not take the hooks as obscure or uninteresting.

Good to go, with a preference for ALT3, even though it has 199 characters (i.e. close to the max of 200). Please do not prune ALT3, because this kind of financial detail is important and should not be messed about with. Thank you. Storye book (talk) 13:58, 10 December 2024 (UTC)