This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography 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.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related articles
Latest comment: 5 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I suggest the WSJ review of this book should not be cited. The book is critical of the WSJ for its refusal (from the writer's perspective) to investigate Madoff. The review quotation is a personal denigration of the writer, not an objective critique of the book. Markopolos writes in the book that the SEC used personal denigration of himself as a justification for not pursuing his complaint against Madoff thoroughly, and this WSJ review seems to be echoing that style of personal attack in place of reasonable response to his criticisms. These facts make the article appear biased, particularly as it concludes with the implication in the WSJ quote that Markopolos's personality is a justification for the fact that, as the title states, "No one would listen." This is known as AD HOMINEM - a fallacy argument using personal rather than objective criteria. Dunlough (talk) 13:30, 30 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
