Talk:List of largest bank failures in the United States

Archives (Index)

2012 2013 2017

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

External links

There are 14 entries in the "External links". Three seems to be an acceptable number and of course, everyone has their favorite to add for four. The problem is that none is needed for article promotion.

• ELpoints #3) states: Links in the "External links" section should be kept to a minimum. A lack of external links or a small number of external links is not a reason to add external links.
• LINKFARM states: There is nothing wrong with adding one or more useful content-relevant links to the external links section of an article; however, excessive lists can dwarf articles and detract from the purpose of Wikipedia. On articles about topics with many fansites, for example, including a link to one major fansite may be appropriate.
• WP:ELMIN: Minimize the number of links.

Trim excess links and remove tag. -- Otr500 (talk) 00:50, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Lehman Brothers?

I don’t have enough understanding of US economics to add it myself, but shouldn’t Bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers be added on this list? ~ Seb35 [^_^] [fr] 10:49, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Especially because the article Lehman Brothers says “ In May 2008, prior to going bankrupt, the firm had $639 billion in assets. “ 2A02:A46A:2C29:1:484:3A8A:4E4B:D08 (talk) 12:12, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

And Bear Sterns had “ $350.4 billion “ worth of assets before failing. 2A02:A46A:2C29:1:484:3A8A:4E4B:D08 (talk) 12:21, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

I have the same question. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 02:05, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Lehman and Bear Sterns were both investment banks, whereas it looks like this article has the unstated inclusion criterion of being a commercial or retail bank. If that was the intention, the text should make it explicit. 73.223.72.200 (talk) 03:09, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

• What about combining two separate tables for investment and retail banks in one article? Ain92 (talk) 22:46, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 11 March 2023

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: consensus to move the page to List of largest bank failures in the United States at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 10:20, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

---

List of largest U.S. bank failures → List of largest United States bank failures - given the controversial nature of the use of "US" vs "U.S." on Wikipedia, I suggest just using the full title. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 19:18, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

• Move to List of largest bank failures in the United States. This is the more usual format for this type of article title. Rreagan007 (talk) 19:54, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
  • @Rreagan007: I support this variant. – Kjerish (talk) 22:03, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
  • Support Rreagan007's proposal, definitely clearer than the current title. --Deeday-UK (talk) 10:26, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
  • I support this variant of the title. 96.18.105.32 (talk) 22:57, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
  • Support alternate Putting the location at the end makes things much more clear. Snowmanonahoe (talk) 12:37, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

  Support this, provides clearest page intent and avoids any misconstruing 169.151.119.156 (talk) 20:21, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

• Move per Rreagan007's suggestion. (The current title could even be construed as describing U.S. Bank failures.) —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 21:12, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
• Support move to List of largest bank failures in the United States. --Shivertimbers433 (talk) 00:14, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
• Support would avoid future circular talk page Pear 2.0 (say hi!) 17:00, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
• Support a move, and I prefer Rreagan007's proposed name. --Tserton (talk) 21:32, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
• Support either this proposal or the alt proposal – however the alt. proposal does match the already extant List of bank failures in the United States (2008–present). (I am surprised that the only articles on this topic focus on the United States – surely there have been enough non-U.S. bank failures to merit their own articles?!) But, bottom line: we should not be abbreviating "United States" to "U.S." in article titles. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:28, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
• Support move to Rreagan007's proposed name. Additionally, we could have List of largest United States bank failures redirect there. --Super Goku V (talk) 10:43, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

• Support move to List of largest bank failures in the United States. The person who loves reading (talk) 15:57, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

• Support the current title seems too informal. Derpytoucan (talk) 18:07, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

• Comment We need to add some wording to indicate that the list is limited to banks that take deposits from retail or commercial customers. Otherwise, it's odd that Lehman Brothers is not on the list, as mentioned in the section above. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:09, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

  Lehman Brothers was not a bank, as it did not collect deposits. They are more aptly described as a shadow bank, as they were a non-bank financial institution. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 19:36, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

  Per recent discussions at WP:ERRORS, it seems the list is based on banks that were FDIC-insured. I've taken a stab at reflecting this in the lead. Re: Lehman, sources seem to refer to it as an investment bank (and probably not w/ FDIC). —Bagumba (talk) 06:16, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

  Also, the FDIC limitation doesn't necessarily need to be in the page title. Per WP:LISTNAME: The title is not expected to contain a complete description of the list's subject. Many lists are not intended to contain every possible member, but this does not need to be explained in the title itself. —Bagumba (talk) 06:24, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

  Investment banks are not considered to be banks in the United States, but are instead treated as broker-dealers; it's a bit of a misnomer that's causing confusion here. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 14:44, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

• Support Rreagan007's proposal. Seems reasonable. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 19:37, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

• Support Rreagan007's proposal. Much clearer title. Timothytyy (talk) 01:20, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

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.

Pre-1970s crashes?

Surprised this doesn't include any Great Depression-era banking failures. What is the earliest cut-off point for inclusion on this list? 2601:14F:4501:1C20:ED22:FACA:C113:C667 (talk) 22:00, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Feel free to cite a reliable source for any missing items. —Bagumba (talk) 12:52, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

@Bagumba Well no, that's not possible given the limitations of the list, which specifies that only FDIC insured banks can be included. That would exclude all pre-Depression banks like Bank of United States. :3 F4U (they/it) 01:13, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Well, consensus can change on the inclusion criteria. At any rate, my point was to cite sources and not to speculate.—Bagumba (talk) 02:15, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

SVB and Signature Bank collapses

I'm not sure the data for the "Assets at time of failure (inflation adjusted, 2021)" is correct. The nominal value and inflation-adjusted surely can't be the same? Alssa1 (talk) 18:44, 20 March 2023 (UTC)