User:CaptMalR

I'm here to advocate for serenitystocks.com and the correct application of Benjamin Graham's methods.

serenitystocks.com is a site dedicated to the study and application of Benjamin Graham's principles and The Intelligent Investor. Graham's teachings are often misrepresented today, and serenitystocks has played a significant role in promoting the correct application of Graham's methods (e.g. Analysts Continue To Use Wrong Benjamin Graham Formula).

Wikipedia:Username policy says a username cannot represent a product. On the other hand, Wikipedia:Advocacy says anyone advocating for a product should mention the same on their user page and after every post in other places. So I'll be using this username henceforth instead of User:Serenitystocks, and mentioning that I'm advocating for serenitystocks.com on every page I post on.

Wikipedia:Advocacy also says "Advocates may place suggestions for new topics, content, or useful references on article talk pages", which is what I will be doing with this username. I will contributing to the article talk pages of articles related to Benjamin Graham, such as The Intelligent Investor, Graham number and Benjamin Graham formula.

I am currently trying to have the following cautionary notes and links added/restored:

1. The Using The Graham Number Correctly cautionary note on the Graham number page.

2. The Analysts Continue To Use Wrong Benjamin Graham Formula cautionary note on the Benjamin Graham formula page.

3. And optionally, the Investing For Beginners With Benjamin Graham informational link on The Intelligent Investor and Benjamin Graham pages.

To share some additional information about the above three links:

1. Analysts Continue To Use Wrong Benjamin Graham Formula is the 2nd result on Google for Benjamin Graham formula.

2. Investing For Beginners With Benjamin Graham is the 2nd result on Google for Benjamin Graham for beginners.

3. Using The Graham Number Correctly is the 6th result on Google for Graham number.

These warnings and links are extremely relevant to the said subjects. Withholding them from readers seems to be against the best interests of both readers and Wikipedia itself.