Talk:Investment rating for real estate

	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.

Business Low‑importance

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles 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.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Cleanup needed[edit]

1. I agree that the articles need to be wikified better and more external citations need to be added. 2. I am curious as to why the link to an external article and a link to SmartZip website has been removed. This start up has created an algorithm that takes into account a large number of parameters to arrive at one numerical score that can act as a universal rating for a property. To my knowledge there is no property investment rating system that is publicly available. I am sure brokers have their own homegrown system for local properties and they keep it very private. 3. The article is neutral in its tone and does not reflect any bias,unlike a bunch of real estate sites on Wiki that look like extension of the company's websites. 4. I am not also sure why this article is being referred to as a bunch of links. Wikipedia prides itself as repository of knowledge (as of date) that can be referenced and is not a site where a new and untested hypothesis is floated.

Clear memory (talk) 19:29, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not an advertising medium for a non-notable website. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:07, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is undisputed that Wikipedia is not a marketing platform but is a source for reliable information. I believe that the link was only informational and in no way promoted or advertised the company. Please note that Wikipedia did not have any page on this topic since no one has created a rating like this. Should we have some objective standards for what is notable and what is not?

Clear memory (talk) 20:46, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not to become a pest but any thoughts on my contention? I reviewed and researched and could not locate any other rating service that does the same for individual properties as the company in question claims to do.

Clear memory (talk) 21:59, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The answer hasn't changed. Wikipedia isn't a link directory for non-notable products or companies. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 22:10, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So the acid test is notability, not Wikipedia not being an advertising medium? In the real estate category there are several articles that are just corporate communication pieces (Zillow is one such example) and not all are notable either. This is confusing...

Clear memory (talk) 00:32, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]