Talk:Littleton Coin Company

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Neutrality[edit]

This article is a description of Littleton Coin Company. It is strictly informative and does not promote or advertise the company in any way. Please read this and compare to our sister company, Mystic Stamp Company's page and you will see it is informative only. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sdube (talkcontribs) Sdube (talkcontribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Comment: When the page was created i tagged it for speedy deletion because it contained the following sentence in the first paragraph: Learn more about the coins available at the main website for Littleton Coin Company. --Itemirus (talk) 14:50, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But wouldn't that be an edit that was removed? The entire article is very unbiased and is very similar to those found on other companies. I apologize for my inexperience, but the article is solid fact and it is a shame to remove the whole thing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sdube (talkcontribs) 12:19, 13 August 2008 (UTC) Sdube (talkcontribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

The article as written was a charming little company advertisement, telling about the founding of the company and the way the little business has expanded. It was not written in an impartial, encyclopedic tone. We want a straightforward presentation of the facts, with proper reliable sources to verify any assertions made. --Orange Mike | Talk 12:59, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pricing section[edit]

A statement about Littleton's higher prices for coins may have a place in the article somewhere, but the section that has now been removed twice is not the way to write it. Links to About.com and a coin dealer's website are not appropriate Wikipedia sources to back up an opinion-based statement. Talshiarr (talk) 02:16, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2012 rewrite[edit]

I'm engaging in a full rewrite, working off a company-published but nonetheless very good and useful Sundman biography, in conjunction with a couple good pieces of journalism and the NYT obit. Hopefully all above concerns will be rendered moot in the process. Carrite (talk) 15:42, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]