Jump to content

Talk:2020 stock market crash

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Zanygenius (talk | contribs) at 18:24, 24 March 2020 (→‎Black Monday 3.0: Reply , ping). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Findnote

Merging Black Monday (2020) and Black Thursday (2020) into 2020 stock market crash

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
Pages redirected to this one. Clear consensus there should not be separate articles that are exact duplicates. Further edits/merging from page history is welcome, but we don't need later edits to be made to one but not the other resulting in nearly-identical but diverging content. Reywas92Talk 08:31, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
attempted SNOW close
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

{{Discussion top|result=Merging per [[WP:Snow]]. No one believes we need separate articles for this. [[User:Benica11|Benica11]] ([[User talk:Benica11|talk]]) 14:43, 14 March 2020 (UTC)}}

I propose to merge Black Thursday (2020) and Black Monday (2020) into this article. There are two reasons:

  • Both days are part of an overall decrease in the stock market due to Coronavirus, and neither day stands out as significant on its own. There have been days in the history of the stock market which have had bigger moves which don't have their own pages. Furthermore, this week there have been days of large upswings in the market, as well as large dislocations in other markets such as bonds and international stocks.
  • There isn't substantial evidence that people have coalesced to call these events "Black Monday" or "Black Thursday".

There are discussions on the talk page for both Black Thursday and Black Monday. Some users have expressed support: @TropicalAnalystwx13, Prad Nelluru, XOR'easter, Renerpho, Revr J, Amakuru, and Juxlos:, and @Nice4What: has expressed position to merging, so I'm pinging everybody involved. ThoseArentMuskets (talk) 19:39, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Far left wing.

Why is the article being used to promote the far leftist view of the Crash?

“The fall was due to recession fears, a lack of investor confidence in President Donald Trump, and the ban the US Government enacted on foreign nationals traveling to the country from the Schengen Area.”

No mention of the coronavirus just about how orange man is bad.--Fruitloop11 (talk) 12:09, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed that sentence, since it's quite biased and worse, unreferenced. -- Mikeblas (talk) 15:54, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Black Monday"

I've done some cleanup after a sloppy merge. In that work, I noticed that the term "Black Monday" is used ambiguously in this article. It might mean the Black Monday of 1987, or the Black Monay of 2020. Is there concensus on how these Mondays should be identified? -- Mikeblas (talk) 15:54, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

From what I can see, IMO, the references in the article to this term are all pretty clear in their contexts. Benica11 (talk) 16:58, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There are multiple black mondays. Examples include Black Monday (1894) and Black Monday (2011). The term is not reserved for a single day. CoronavirusPlagueDoctor (talk) 21:01, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Both 9 March and 16 March 2020 are now widely called "Black Monday", so I have disambiguated by adding the exact dates to the section names. Renerpho (talk) 18:40, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 14 March 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: clear consensus not to move the page to the proposed title at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 09:42, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

2020 stock market crash → 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic bear market – I propose changing the title of this article to "2019–20 coronavirus pandemic bear market" because at least 7 benchmark stock market indices in Asia-Pacific, Europe, the U.S., and emerging markets have been declared to be in bear markets. -- CommonKnowledgeCreator (talk) 16:34, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@BegbertBiggs: Thanks. Not very familiar with the bureaucracy of this website. -- CommonKnowledgeCreator (talk) 17:07, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think "2020 stock market crash" is very broad (we have a lot of time left to run in 2020 and it could cover many markets), so I would tighten it to a more specific period. The key here is to think what a reader would put into the search bar in looking for this specific article. I would say that is should at least be something like: March 2020 global stock market crash. I would omit the "coronavirus" part in the title as the oil shock was part of it (it is linked to the virus, but not exclusively so). It would also allow the article to focus specifically on the last crazy week in markets, and still fit as a "carve-out" of the broader: "Financial impact of the 2020-2019 corona pandemic", which is going to have even more material (as we go along) about the resulting global economic recessions that will/are occuring, and the potential melt-downs in specific industries like Cruises and Airlines. Britishfinance (talk) 17:00, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Britishfinance: I would argue that the "coronavirus" should be included in the title simply because that's what initiated the decline. The oil price war punctuated it but the decline began on 20 February, not 9 March. -- CommonKnowledgeCreator (talk) 17:10, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Britishfinance: I would add that in the United States the yield curve on the benchmark U.S. Treasury security has been normal for two days now and was normal minus the 3-month security the day prior, so recession concerns in the United States at present are off. -- CommonKnowledgeCreator (talk) 17:42, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. The current title sums up the situation using WP:RECOGNIZEable words ("bear market" is a bit of a technical term, that might not be accessible to everyone). Also matches language in use in sources, about crashes: [1][2] There is also no need to add March 2020,this is the only crash in the year so far, so WP:CONCISE and WP:PRECISE policies dictate that 2020 is fine.  — Amakuru (talk) 17:54, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Amakuru: I disagree; "bear market" is not too technical as it has been used for the titles of other articles (such as United States bear market of 2007–2009 and has a definition in the article about Market trends). And since a bear market has been what has been occurring, it seems to me that the title I have proposed would actually be even more precise. -- CommonKnowledgeCreator (talk) 18:19, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Simplicity and common sense apply here I think. "Bear market" is (almost) just stating that a stock market crash happened anyway, and the bear market did not begin in 2019 as the proposed title might imply. —Nizolan (talk · c.) 18:46, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, there are more factors than the pandemic here (e.g. oil price crash, central banking mis-steps etc.); too POV to attribute the crash solely to the pandemic. I would support adding the term "global" to this (e.g. 2020 global stock market crash), to clarify that it was a global event (e.g. almost every index from US, Europe, FTSE, and Nikkei are down +20%; for the Eurostoxx 600, it has its largest one-day crash in its history). Britishfinance (talk) 18:49, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't mind "global" but I'm not sure it's necessary since without a location people will assume it's global anyway—see Indefensible's Financial crisis of 2007–08 comparison above. —Nizolan (talk · c.) 18:58, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Britishfinance: If we're not going to change the title to my proposal, I think at a minimum including "global" in the current title is necessary. -- CommonKnowledgeCreator (talk) 19:00, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I think it should have "global" in the name. The [[Financial crisis of 2007–08 was fine, but by then, the event had been labelled the "Financial crisis", and thus didn't need the term "global" attached. This period of global synchronised stock market crashes has, as yet, no real label, so global can help capture that a unique aspect (more than any other period of stock market crashes in history) is the extraordinary level of synchronised movements in global markets (e.g. they are all crashing). Britishfinance (talk) 19:09, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The coronavirus pandemic has been recognized as the primary cause of the global bear markets, fueled by anxiety over fears this could result in recessions in affected countries. And just to be clear, bear market status was accrued last month when stock markets were at record highs prior to the mayhem, but became official this week after declines exceeded 20% (typical threshold for a bear market). 9March2019 (talk) 19:25, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment (I know this is WP:CRYSTALBALL, but still): We are only talking about the COVID-19 pandemic at the moment, but there might be other things that we may want to add in the future. I don't have a crystal ball, but who knows what effect things like Brexit have on this stock market crash (the EU and UK would have to get their deal fixed by the end of 2020). I don't want to lock the title to the cause. There is rarely a single cause to something as complex as this. Leaving the proposed cause (the pandemic) out of the title may save us pain later on. Renerpho (talk) 19:27, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose, but just because I disagree with the proposed title, largely per my support of the merge request from the Black Thursday article. We're too soon after this event to really have a consensus among reliable sources of what this incident represents. I think calling it a "bear market" or "crash" both may run afoul of WP:NDESC and WP:LABEL at least until there's better support for those terms within the proper reliable sources. I should note that we should exercise caution when using financial industry trade press rather than academic sources. Wikipedia prefers to take the trade press with a grain of salt. Cf. WP:ORGIND's warning about the use of trade publications to support the notability of articles about corporations or products. In that same vein, I think we need to look for discussion in the academic press that uses these specific terms to describe these specific events. All told I do agree with Britishfinance that it's probably inappropriate to fully or even largely attribute the stock market movements to the coronavirus pandemic. 199.66.69.88 (talk) 20:15, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, as the market may not always stay as a bear market, and the coronavirus is not the only cause. CoronavirusPlagueDoctor (talk) 20:52, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strongly Oppose. Firstly the issue is with the "2019-20" part, as the market has only being in a bear market during the year 2020. Secondly, the Coronavirus is not the single cause for the market crash. There were predictions when the yield curve became inverted during 2019 that a stock market crash accompanied by a reccession was on it's way. As the situation continues to unfold, it could simply be that coronavirus has 'sped up' the 'innevitable' crash rather then being the central cause for it. Thirdly, from what I can tell, there aren't many news outlets calling this the "coronavirus bear market", but rather the "2020 stock market crash" or "global stock market crash". For those reasons, I strongly oppose. Foxterria (talk) 00:17, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for brevity and understandability. "Stock market crash" is a sufficiently descriptive term that is much easier to comprehend. Juxlos (talk) 01:02, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose because the proposed title is non-standard, too long & makes it wrongly sound like coronavirus is the only reason for the crash. The 2020 Russia-Saudi Arabia oil price war is also a major factor. The huge fall in the price of oil pulled stock markets down further. Oil companies are some of the largest constituents of major indices. Jim Michael (talk) 07:40, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per above. The title works as it is. Jusdafax (talk) 10:22, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, but add coronavirus in parenthesis Most people know what a stock market crash is but not what a bear market is (or confuse it with a bull market). On the other hand stock market crash is very generic title, and the name change suggestion makes a good point to include coronavirus in the title!TPape (talk) 13:18, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: In general, trying to attribute a clear cause-and-effect relationship for a market crash is a bad idea. This seems like making the title more complicated in order to try to explain why the market crashed. The subject of the article is the crash itself, and speculations about why it crashed belong in the article body. —BarrelProof (talk) 15:50, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – Large, clunky, and hard to remember. No plausible benefits to such a page move. Master of Time (talk) 22:38, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Disambiguation may be needed if there are several stock market crashes this year, but for now, the current title is concise and recognizable. - MrX 🖋 23:00, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose most sources indicate it as stock market crash rather than calling it a bear market. We should also focus on readers who lack financial literacy who might not know what is bull market and what is bear market. It is better to stay with the existing heading. Abishe (talk) 02:59, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Could be globalized

The Black Thursday section (maybe the entire article) could be globalized somewhat. Right now, it focuses too much on the situation in the United States, in particular on the Dow Jones. Even though the text gives due weight to other countries, the article lead image and all the tables feature the Dow Jones' motion only, which may not be representative. Among the large indices, its loss over the whole week was one of the lowest (only 10%). Japan's Nikkei lost 16%; the UK's FTSE 17%; Germany's DAX and the Euro Stoxx 50 both lost 20%. Italy's FTSE MIB has lost 30%; Austria 31%. I am not saying that we need tables for all of those, but right now, a reader who just glances over the article may focus on the tables only without reading the text, and that will only tell them about the Dow Jones, not about the global event. Renerpho (talk) 04:16, 15 March 2020 (UTC) Edited Renerpho (talk) 04:21, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Renerpho: If you could help me find refs for declines in at least one benchmark stock market index for each of the G20 countries, I will more than gladly summarize them in the text. -- CommonKnowledgeCreator (talk) 05:15, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@CommonKnowledgeCreator:Here are the G20 countries with their benchmark stock indices and losses over the Mar 9-13 week, with references:

Losses would be about double that for many when counted from the January/February 2020 highs, which in most cases represented all-time highs. Counting from March 9th seems somewhat arbitrary to be, as it's not really the beginning of the crash. It worked when the table was just about the Black Monday and Black Thursday events, before the articles were merged, but that practice may have to be adopted to the new scope of the article. The data in the cited references generally covers all of 2020 and before. The available sources I could find that cover the South African and South Korean indices are blacklisted by Wikipedia (investing.com, tradingeconomics.com), hence why there is no reference for these.Renerpho (talk) 07:31, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely, this article, which only focuses on the United States for now, should be globalized. And if the pandemic ends up being a carbon copy of the Financial crisis of 2007–08, it can be renamed to 2020 coronavirus pandemic crisis. 9March2019 (talk) 17:30, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Also absolutely agree this article should be globalised. What it most notable about the last few weeks is the unprecedented synchronisation between all global stock markets. Individual records are being set all over the place (e.g. largest drop for the Eurostoxx market in its history, as it wasn't around in 1987). Should be the 2020 global stock market crash. Britishfinance (talk) 23:41, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "S&P/ASX 200 Historical Data". Yahoo. 14 March 2020. Retrieved 15 March 2020.
  2. ^ "MERVAL Historical Data". Yahoo. 14 March 2020. Retrieved 15 March 2020.
  3. ^ "IBOVESPA Historical Data". Yahoo. 14 March 2020. Retrieved 15 March 2020.
  4. ^ "S&P/TSX Composite Index Historical Data". Yahoo. 14 March 2020. Retrieved 15 March 2020.
  5. ^ "SSE Composite Index Historical Data". Yahoo. 14 March 2020. Retrieved 15 March 2020.
  6. ^ "CAC 40 Historical Data". Yahoo. 14 March 2020. Retrieved 15 March 2020.
  7. ^ "DAX Historical Data". Yahoo. 14 March 2020. Retrieved 15 March 2020.
  8. ^ "BSE SENSEX Historical Data". Yahoo. 14 March 2020. Retrieved 15 March 2020.
  9. ^ "IDX Composite Historical Data". Yahoo. 14 March 2020. Retrieved 15 March 2020.
  10. ^ "FTSE MIB Historical Data". Business Insider. 14 March 2020. Retrieved 15 March 2020.
  11. ^ "Nikkei 225 Historical Data". Yahoo. 14 March 2020. Retrieved 15 March 2020.
  12. ^ "IPC Historical Data". Yahoo. 14 March 2020. Retrieved 15 March 2020.
  13. ^ "RTSI Historical Data". Yahoo. 14 March 2020. Retrieved 15 March 2020.
  14. ^ "TASI Historical Data". Yahoo. 14 March 2020. Retrieved 15 March 2020.
  15. ^ "XU100 Historical Data". Yahoo. 14 March 2020. Retrieved 15 March 2020.
  16. ^ "FTSE 100 Historical Data". Yahoo. 14 March 2020. Retrieved 15 March 2020.
  17. ^ "S&P 500 Index Historical Data". Yahoo. 14 March 2020. Retrieved 15 March 2020.

WikiProject COVID-19

I've created WikiProject COVID-19 as a temporary or permanent WikiProject and invite editors to use this space for discussing ways to improve coverage of the ongoing 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic. Please bring your ideas to the project/talk page. Stay safe, --Another Believer (Talk) 18:03, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yield curve inversion

Towards the end of 2019 I remember significant discussions around the inverted yield curve predicting another recession, is this relevant? Faissaloo (talk) 19:17, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Faissaloo: The New York Federal Reserve uses the inversion of the yield curve on the benchmark U.S. Treasury security as a six-month lead indicator of a recession. However, as of the last three days of trading (including today), the yield curve has remained normal. -- CommonKnowledgeCreator (talk) 20:19, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Also, these are two independent events with the 2019 yield curve inversion having different reasons than the current crash (Coronavirus). The yield curve inversion is a long-term indicator and the current crash is a short term event. --hroest 01:42, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
But this article is not about the Coronavirus crash, it's about the stock market crash of 2020. As discussed elsewhere on this talk page, there is no reason to assume a single cause even when one appears as obvious as here. This crash is not caused by the coronavirus alone. If a recession had been predicted last year then that's potentially relevant as a contributing factor/ as backstory. Renerpho (talk) 01:48, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, that is likely the case and as often, these events are multi-factorial. However, to include that in the article we would require a credible WP:SOURCE that makes these connections. It is likely that such analyses will be published in the aftermath, maybe its just WP:TOOEARLY for this to make the connection between short and long term, especially as these events are so recent and a long-term view is not yet possible. --hroest 02:49, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Black Monday II

Merging them is fine, but I think Black Monday II (March 16) at least deserves a bold headline. After all it was the second greatest one-day crash ever!

Black Monday II was just created. Should probably be merged here as the other articles were. Pinging @LordParsifal: who created the new article. Schazjmd (talk) 21:14, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it should be merged. Inventing names for these events is technically original research, and we don't need a new article for every day. XOR'easter (talk) 21:32, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Because all the content there is already in this article, I went ahead and made that page into a redirect. I don't think there is yet a need to spin out sub-pages from this article. XOR'easter (talk) 21:38, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It's not WP:OR. 16 March has been called Black Monday by many news outlets as early as 16 hours ago. Like by The Straights Times (referring to crash in Asia before it hit Europe and the US hours later), FXStreet, Asia Times, and others in multiple languages, like German erneuter schwarzer Montag ("another black monday") from Deutschlandfunk.[3] Renerpho (talk) 23:53, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This and the section We're looking at another 'Black Monday are basically the same discussion, so I am boldly merging them to ease discussion. Renerpho (talk) 01:53, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We're looking at another 'Black Monday'

With Futures crashing in Wall Street today, and Europe set for the same fate, we may be looking at another 'Black Monday' within the same month. That crash is due to the Fed cutting rates to 0%, which hasn't being done since 2008 thus deepening recession fears. Wiki users need to use other names to describe these significant downturns as the market crashes multiple times throughout the month of March, maybe even calling the month "Black March" or something and describing each significant fall? Share your thoughts and any sources describing names for Black Monday and Thursday. Foxterria (talk) 23:11, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Foxterria: I think just shows why the Black Monday (2020) & Black Thursday (2020) need to be deleted since all of the content is now in this article. I will update the 2020 stock market crash article, just as I had been updating the Socio-economic impact of the 2019-20 coronavirus pandemic article every day since 2 March, at the closing bell at NYSE in the US at 4PM tomorrow. -- CommonKnowledgeCreator (talk) 23:36, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@CommonKnowledgeCreator: I agree entirely, the seperate days of crashing is apart of a larger ongoing crash, the Market's aren't being as romantic as they have being in the past by giving us one unique day of a crash. These articles need to be deleted, another crash on Monday should hopefully convince other wiki users to do so. Foxterria (talk) 23:44, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
They don't need to be deleted as the names were used in our sources. They will very likely exist as redirects. —Locke Cole • t • c 00:29, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The sources are themselves questionable at best in terms of reliability for this sort of thing. As I've said elsewhere, Wikipedia already disfavors industry trade press when it comes to corporate and product articles. Just because you can find some publication out there using a polemical name for an event doesn't mean we should use it. We avoid "-gate" and other scandal-phrases like these except where there's widespread, enduring usage. Because we have merges underway for the existing articles, those redirects will likely persist, but we shouldn't be creating "Black Monday (16 March 2020)" anytime soon, at least until the academic press actually uses it. 199.66.69.88 (talk) 03:42, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That's a very nice strawman you've made there. I like what you did with the hair. —Locke Cole • t • c 05:42, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Needlessly rude. Surprised you aren’t still on an editing restriction. 199.66.69.88 (talk) 02:35, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You'll get over it. —Locke Cole • t • c 02:55, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It isn't Wikipedia's job to come up with either the name or the analysis by itself. If "Black March" becomes a common name in reliable sources it might be usable, and if it doesn't then it's not. —Nizolan (talk · c.) 13:47, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Nizolan:It isn't, but we seem to have already done so with "black monday" and "black thursday". We should refer to them as the "Crash of X date" to avoid the term of "Black", considering there aren't many news agencies or reliable sources using those terms. I was simply using 'Black March' as a possible overarch, or calling for other people to provide sources which describe their names. Foxterria (talk) 21:56, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 18 March 2020

"The People's Bank of China announced that it would reduce is reserve requirement"

Please change "is" to "its" 2601:5C6:8080:100:AC6B:A0E0:1FBB:1032 (talk) 01:24, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Done —Locke Cole • t • c 03:18, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Edit for grammatical proposes

Hello,

Section 24–28 February has grammatical error:

> On 28 February, stock markets worldwide reported their largest single-week declines since the 2008 financial crisis,[65][66][67] while oil futures saw

>> their largest single week decline in since >> 2009

Since I do not have edit privileges, I'm raising this to the attention of anyone else that does.

Yamenu2013 (talk) 15:04, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Yamenu2013:  Done -- CommonKnowledgeCreator (talk) 14:34, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 18 March 2020

Withdrawn - please remove.

68.13.105.211 (talk) 18:54, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Note: Closed as request seems to be withdrawn by requester Alucard 16❯❯❯ chat? 20:51, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Black Monday 3.0

Okay, we're probably in for a Black Monday 3.0. Pacific stocks are already down 8% and it's quite likely that this Black Monday will be worse then Black Monday I, and plausible it'll be worse then Black Monday II as unemployment rates are expected to skyrocket the most in the history of the United States (According to Goldman Sach's predictions, 2.25 million will lose their jobs this week). Same affects being felt vibrating across Europe, Asia and Oceania. We need better names, come on - 3 "Black Monday's" in one month is kinda ridiculous, and though it's possible we're about to reach the bottom of this crash no one knows whether or not there's gonna be ANOTHER crash on top of that. We need to change the names, maybe the "Crash of X date" would be more suiting in this situation? Considering there are so many global crashes occurring right now. Foxterria (talk) 23:35, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unserious suggestions: son of Black Monday? Black Monday's father's brother's nephew's cousin's former roommate? XOR'easter (talk) 00:21, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Foxterria and XOR'easter: I have placed a request with the administrator (the honorable RegentsPark) who placed the semi-protection status for this past week to extend the protection so that hopefully we don't get more vandalism this week. -- CommonKnowledgeCreator (talk) 01:16, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I've made it indefinite. Hopefully, that will make your life easier! --regentspark (comment) 13:38, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to put in a request for an updated graph at the top of the page. This one is weeks out of date. Ditto for the table graphs throughoout. The topic is important and current, and graphs help readers understand it. Thanks. 75.101.104.17 (talk) 01:29, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As I've maintained File:Stock market crash (2020).svg for about a week, it's usually updated whenever the market closes lower (my intention is to "freeze" it once the market goes back up, unless consensus emerges to continue updating the image). That being said, it was updated just yesterday, and unless something changes Monday, will likely be updated again after the market closes Monday. Which graph is "weeks out of date"? —Locke Cole • t • c 01:36, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. I get your point that the Dow Jones graph will be frozen once there is a turnaround. I also see below that folks are asking for the removal of other tables, which were lagging. For what it's worth, i support globalization of the article because modern markets operate around the world. Thanks for all you do. 75.101.104.17 (talk) 17:10, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@CommonKnowledgeCreator, Foxterria, XOR'easter, and 75.101.104.17: Per this discussion: The term "Black March" has now been thrown around on this page, and I think it may be worthwhile to bring it up here. Wikipedia has three "Black" articles on the subject already (all redirects), which brings home the point, in my opinion, to need to use a more general article. I think Black March is okay, as so long as everyone is calling it that. Otherwise, I would make a Black Monday 3.0 section in 2020 stock market crash. What do you think? Sincerely, User:Zanygeniuschat For info on 1 Jul 20 move, see this. 18:24, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Title question

Should the title have Coronavirus in it? The pandemic is the direct cause of the incident. Such as 2020 coronavirus pandemic stock market crash? AmericanAir88(talk) 17:04, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This was discussed recently, see Talk:2020_stock_market_crash#Requested_move_14_March_2020. Useight (talk) 18:00, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@AmericanAir88: No, it wouldn't be a good idea. There is a global consensus in stock brokers that the pandemic isn't the direct cause, but an accelerant of a market that was already slowing down and (potentially) about to crash (inverted curve yield). Coronavirus is one of the main causes, but as the situation unfolds, it's becoming clear that liquidity, high housing prices, consumer halt in growth (even before the pandemic, this was occurring), collapse of interest rates, trade wars and debt bubbles are all factors in the crash. It's too variable to simply blame it on COVID-19, and doing so would gloss over other important factors of the crash. Foxterria (talk) 20:02, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of Table Summaries

Can we get rid of the table summaries in the article? They only focus on the Dow Jones Industrial Average, when the crash has affected global stock market indices (Japan's Nikkei Average, Hong Kong's Hang Seng Index, etc.). 9March2019 (talk) 01:31, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think that we should remove the table summaries, and instead convert them possibly to 2020 Stock Market Crash in the United States, and make various sub-articles to globalize this article. Foxterria (talk) 04:28, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Globalizing this article

As of just now, it's being quite obvious that this article has being somewhat focused on the United States. I've done a complete overhaul of the layout to make the article more globalized, with response pages linked under the tab 'Response' for now, though this can be change to something like 'Impact by Region'. This is to make sure that the article is not centered on one stock market in particular, as it has being with the Dow Jones. Help me continue to work to clean up the article (We really don't have to mention every day), and globalize the article even more so with it's content. If you want be specific on the impacts regionally, create a page for the provided country or use the page currently made. Please use this section to discuss further globalization of the article and detailing changes made to the article. Foxterria (talk) 06:08, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Content pertaining to daily stock market performances should also be moved to respective sub-articles (country-specific) so as to conform to Wikipedia:Article size standards. 9March2019 (talk) 12:39, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2020_stock_market_crash&oldid=947167613"