Talk:Thomas W. Lamont

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles Finance & Investment Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Finance & Investment, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Finance and Investment on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Finance & InvestmentWikipedia:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentTemplate:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentFinance & Investment articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was the subject of an educational assignment in 2013 Q3. Further details were available on the "Education Program:St. John's University/Discover New York 585 (Fall 2013)" page, which is now unavailable on the wiki.

The Wikipedia Article on Thomas W. Lamont was acceptable, but not great. It was missing a lot of detail that the American National Biography written by Stephen Goldfarb had, however, it also provided some details the ANB article did not. The Wikipedia article had only two sources in its bibliography and resulted in lack of detail. There is no information on the authors on either article. The only complaint though on the Wikipedia talk page was that the picture of Lamont might be copyrighted, but that does not affect the credibility of the article. The overall article was very short and was mostly little quips about his career. The ANB article was much more thorough, reliable, and better than the Wikipedia page. To start off, the “Early Life” section of the wikipedia article was severely lacking detail. It failed to mention his parents’ names, his financial struggles, and how he overcame learning problems because he was not prepared for school. It also didn’t say how he switched from journalism to finance. The article touched based on the jobs he had, but didn’t go into detail about them. Wikipedia failed to mention that Lamont was Vice President of the First National Bank and skipped right to his career at “J.P. Morgan.” This section had some detail, but missed a lot of important information. The article didn’t even say how he got that position. It lacked the great detail the ANB went into. It did, however, have subcategories of the different points of his J.P. Morgan career, but I think that instead of making it more organized, it just made it less detailed. Ending on a good note, the Wikipedia article had good information on Thomas’s philanthropic donations. It also had a whole section, although fairly short, on his life in his older years. It talked about when and where he died, his children and grandchildren, which the ANB article did not touch upon. Also, the bibliography on the ANB site far surpasses the Wikipedia references like I mentioned in the first paragraph. The Wikipedia article has two book sources, one not even completely about Lamont. The ANB article gave at least 8 references and where he found them so that the reader can find them too. They were books or articles completely dedicated to Lamont, along with information and reading from Lamont's family. The wikipedia article only had one book that was totally about Lamont and one book that had a section about Lamont. Katie Hoer (talk) 08:06, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]