Talk:William Delbert Gann/Archive 1

Price and Time

Gann used price, as well as time to make forecasts. That really helped me. I was trading stocks based on how many beers I had left in my fridge. I'm glad I found this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.14.57.35 (talk) 18:31, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Objection to entire entry

Somnus March 27th 07: The fact that we, scientific or financial mainstream today disbelieve some of Gann's ideas related to astrology, religion or natural laws doesn't mean such claims should be censored and left out from his biography. The article does not judge profitability of any particular method. It contains general facts about historical figure in technical analysis. There is no reason for dispute notice any more. My vote to remove it.

I think this entire entry at its present form should be removed as it doesn't stand up to basic Wikipedia standards. It looks like a simple "copy and paste" from sites of companies like "Safety in the market" which promote suspicious scams pretending to teach Gann's theory.

A simple search on the web can find many references which question Gann's theory, including alegations that his "method" is actually based on numerology and astrology. (As an anacdotal support of this - I visited a promotional seminar of "Safety In the Markets" where the lecturer pointed out that all major stock crisis happened in years ending with "7" and therefore 2007 is destined to be a crisis year).

On the other hand - keeping this article in Wikipedia in its present form devaluates the value of Wikipedia, IMHO.

I'll look at other ways to raise this issue with the Wikipedia editors. If someone who reads this know how else should I point my objection to this version of the article then please let me know.

Penedo 01:07, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Gann was the Alesteir Crowley of the financial markets. He is a myth, legend, what have you, but he is held up as an icon by ripoff artists.

gann is a myth, this article is ridiculous

I agree with the comments above and I believe the most likely reason people would be looking at this article would be after seeing the information presented by suspicious investment training companies like 'safety in the markets'. I don't want to delete the article myself because I'm not familiar with wikipedias regulations on such matters, but I certainly think it should be removed. 203.206.54.181 10:18, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

203.206.54.181 10:19, 22 March 2007 (UTC) Funnily enough, i came here to read this article precisely because I had received something in the mail from Safety in the Markets, and had never heard of this so-called investment guru before. I thank you for the warnings, and after looking into it, am also included to suggest that this article be pulled. The LLama, 13 March 07[reply]

203.206.54.181 10:19, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ICEBreaker 10 April 2007 Ref: Ver. 2007-03-21T20:35:23. The article in its present form seems fine. It states only facts (e.g. Gann claimed that...), and in no way purports that Gann's theories work. It may not be in Wikipedia format, but it does give some basic information on Gann, which I think is useful. Deletion of this topic will result in readers seeking other references which are less neutral. I vote to leave this entry here, and try to improve on it. This is one of the few places with credible information. Also suggest we remove the "neutrality in dispute" tag, as the information provided IS neutral. There are no pro / against remarks. Just facts about the person's life.

Astrology?

I removed direct links to astrology and occultism. The main idea of W.D.Gann research has nothing with astrology. He claimed that after a temporary reaction price has an urge to go back into the trend. He claimed that he can easily track the price. Maybe, it is not always true. But that's the idea. Nothing more, nohing less. Vugluskr 20:41, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Citation need?

About Gann's son blaming his father, some wiki editor can add the citation which is needed after first paragraph (I don't know how to do it) to poin to Alexander Elder's "Trading for a living" book. In his book at page 23, talking about dead gurus, Dr. Elder is saying: "...but the best example of such a legend is WD Gann. Various opportunists sell 'Gann courses' and 'Gann Software'. They claim that Gann was one of the best traders who ever lived, that he left $50 milions in estates and so on. I personally interviewed WD Gann's son, an analyst for a Boston bank. He told me that his famous father could not support his family by trading, but earned his living by writing and selling instructional courses. When WD Gann died in 1950s, his estate, including his house, was valued at slightly over $100,000. The legend of W.D. Gann, the giant of trading, is perpetuated by those who sell courses and other paraphernalia to gullible customers." —Preceding unsigned comment added by anonymous (talk) 06:55, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Recent Edits by WDG45

WDG45 - Thanks for the good work on the Gann edits. That article definitely needed to be expanded. However, it appears as if much of this work is original research. You cannot put in your own interpretations of how Tunnel and other works relate to his beliefs and how he saw the world. Unless you can provide reliable sources for much of the statements, much of your edits will have to be removed. Please see WP:NOR and WP:RS for further info. Sposer (talk) 20:19, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please note recent spammer

http://www.davidyap.net is a personal site. The user has been warned.Sposer (talk) 12:23, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Overall Article

This article needs to be rewritten. WDG45 has done some good work, but it is all OR. The links all border on spam. I will seek out some people that know Gann well to fix this up. Sposer (talk) 12:23, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Frankly this article is a mess - it's a textbook example of what wikipedia is not, it's largely an essay of original research. --Cameron Scott (talk) 01:10, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted

I've deleted this as a copyvio as it appears to be composed entirely of cut-and-pasted paragraphs from various subpages of http://www.gann.co.uk/. (Even should they grant permission, it would be a hopeless COI and deletable as spam). This deletion is no criticism of the validity of the topic – the man certainly is notable – but I can't see a valid version to revert to. (I'll check all the deleted revisions and see if I can find a viable non-copyvio non-spam version to restore.) I'm leaving this talk page undeleted for the moment in case anyone has any comments regarding this. – iride scent 01:45, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Further to the above, I can't see a viable version in the history; the original version of the article was a cut and paste from this page, and this copyvio is preserved in every subsequent version. – iride scent 01:47, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]