![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 |
The article currently redirects the reader to the credentialing section where the occupations box asks for education requirements. I thought it might be right to also state here that before the examinations one would need to have a bachelor's degree to qualify. I know this is the case in the UK and am reasonably sure the same goes for other countries. Any objections?-- Zoso Jade ( talk) 08:41, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
The page was recently edited to say that the Queens University in Belfast gives the most exemptions of all universities at 8. Evidence is needed that no other university gives 8 exemptions as I do not believe this claim to be true.
I did not do a degree that gives exemptions but I am pretty sure that if a pupil does sufficiently well at Cass Business School's Master's course they do not have to do any of the 8 CTs. This would appear to verify my point as all eight CTs are listed as covered on the course.
I have seen several of my workmates come in with 8 exemptions and none of them attended the Queen's University. Thanks-- Zoso Jade ( talk) 11:36, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
So says a new study, according to The Wall Street Journal. The survey was conducted by a company that seems non-notable, so I don't think it warrants mention in the article, but I thought I'd mention it here in case other editors disagree and want to update the article. — Malik Shabazz ( talk · contribs) 03:49, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
This sentence surprised me:
As I was reading it, I fully expected it was introducing the concept of reserving. I think of retrospective reinsurance as a very special case, perhaps worth mentioning in its own right, but I would prefer to see this paragraph expanded, first mentioning reserving, and optionally discussing some of the smaller examples. Obviously, I can make the change myself, but I'd like to see what others think, in case I'm missing something obvious.-- Sphilbrick ( talk) 17:45, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
I understand why more than one person deleted the link, but I disagree. I looked at it quickly, and didn't disagree. But I see it has been added back (with an explanation). I looked at it closer, and think it is an acceptable addition. I first thought it was a personal website, largely talking about the author's experiences therefore questionable. While some sections do talk about the author's experiences, they constitute a minority of the overall website, which does have decent and relevant information for someone interested in the actuarial field. I do understand it is questionable, but I think people should look through the site more careful before assuming it is simply a vanity site.-- SPhilbrick T 00:54, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
thanks for spending the time reading the website and provide some valuable feedback. The original motivation of this website is to provide a personal view & touch on the profession (to differentiate from those official actuarial society and association's website). thanks again and will do some revision on the grammer! Mulaohu ( talk) 15:33, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
External links in articles are subject to the guidelines at WP:EL, with the caveat that parsimony is desired, as per "External links to an article can be helpful to the reader, but they should be kept minimal, meritable, and directly relevant to the article." While I appreciate the effort Mulaohu put into the website, we already have links that allows readers to read personal anecdotes from actuaries—many more actuaries than a single person's perspective, and these are the BeAnActuary and Actuarial Outpost links. These allow the interested reader to get a much wider, if not truly global, perspective of the profession. Furthermore, under links to be avoided (and I understand this does not mean ipso facto forbidden) the eleventh entry is "Links to blogs, personal web pages and most fansites, except those written by a recognized authority (this exception is meant to be very limited; as a minimum standard, recognized authorities always meet Wikipedia's notability criteria for biographies)." Therefore, at this point, I think that the "IAmActuary" site is not appropriate for the article, both in and of itself and in contrast to the existing links. Thank you. -- Avi ( talk) 20:11, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
The difference between Mulaohu's site and the AO, is that the AO is frequented by actuaries from all over the world, including leaders of the various societies such as Bruce Schobel, Mary Pat Campbell, Glenn Myers, Arlie Proctor, and a bunch of others under their real names. There is extensive help for exams and actuarial basics too. It is a rich resource for actuaries, more so than a website reflecting a single person's opinion, at least in my opinion. -- Avi ( talk) 20:31, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
I looked at each of the five external links, to see if they met wp:EL. My position is that one does with no qualifications, one does, but raises issues, and three do not.
Post from Actuarial outpost
|
---|
words of love, soft and tender Posted 07-13-2009 at 11:38 AM by sweetiepie Updated 07-13-2009 at 08:19 PM by sweetiepie It's been a 4 day weekend. My phone, my laptop, and my pda are recharging. I'm recharging, drinking diet coke and playing Anno 1404, a retarded resource management game. I've been doing so for 3 hours and there's nothing on my mind except the providing my citizens with luxuries. I receive a super sweet text from the girl: "Now here's the part where I fall asleep without your arms around me. Should be simple enough, right? Millions of people do it every night." "ps take care of yourself this week darling" I don't know. I guess I should say something. So I keep her rhyme pattern and write. "It'll be easier not having to worry about your arm circulation or your pillow situation, or waking you on the way to the jon again and again." Oh hell why not. "Or being kept awake by the steady shock of your living beauty." "so fcking annoying you know? goodnight darling." She's a romantic and a Romantic, so I can get away with corny sht like 'living beauty'. If only it were true. I mean, she is beautiful, and her being alive, sleeping next to you demands respect. But it didn't keep me awake. We didn't spend our nights in hi-def, as far as I was concerned. I mean, once again, I hope she doesn't fall in love with me. She's not the type to, she hails from the sensualist side of the fence, but she wants me for my words, and words are dangerous. They want to be used. It's like being well hung. Only, if you're well hung, the most you'll bruise is a cervix. I have the power to cause cardiac damage. |
I'll emphasize that I doubt that this post is representative, but it's the first one I found.
I lean toward delete, but I'd like to hear other input first.
I don't think that the current description of an actuary provides a clear idea to people of what actuaries actually do. It merely links actuaries with financial risk - but what is it that actuaries actually do and what do companies pay them for? In the opening actuarial subject of my actuarial uni degree one of the first things they did was provide us with what they thought is the most comprehensive, clear and concise definition of an actuary: "An actuary is a professional who analyses risky cash flows to provide advice for the purpose of strategic decision making." I can find a broadly similar definition here: http://www.actuaries.org/ABOUT/Brochures/Actuarial_Profession_EN.pdf Utopial ( talk) 08:50, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
-- Avi ( talk) 01:37, 10 January 2010 (UTC)The future is uncertain. Some of the events that can happen are undesirable. "Risk" is the possibility that an undesirable event will occur. Actuaries are experts in:
*Evaluating the likelihood of future events
*Designing creative ways to reduce the likelihood of undesirable events
*Decreasing the impact of undesirable events that do occur.
Why is this section removed again and again?
Typically, an actuarial career progresses through several roles, depending on qualifications and experience, such as:
within an organisation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.225.218.253 ( talk) 05:43, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
Actuaries are a type of statisticians, and thus the article is in scope. -- Avi ( talk) 04:36, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
I think it is about time that the credentialing section be spun off into its own article, per summary style. Perhaps a brief mention of the largest systems worldwide (UK, US, Australia) can be mentioned, but it should be brief and lead to a new article. Any ideas for the name of the new article; something like " Actuarial credentials"? -- Avi ( talk) 22:44, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
It's about eight months, and no one has commented; shall I take that to mean overwhelming support? :-) -- Avi ( talk) 22:23, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
Can't we find a nicer pic than Katrina?
Say, a cemetery?
Or the Bills of Mortality? Or Lloyds of London? Meepbobeep ( talk) 11:06, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
I'm an actuary. My wife took a picture (that we have on our Flickr site) of me at work. There's me at the desk, a coputer screen showing a spreadsheet, stacks of Annual Statements and binders, and lots of other clutter. You could use that. 64.61.120.42 ( talk) 19:05, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
Here is a reference of sorts for the fact that Robert J. Randall Sr. was the first black actuary. FSA 1952
Sugarfoot1001 07:36, 25 August 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sugarfoot1001 ( talk • contribs)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 |
The article currently redirects the reader to the credentialing section where the occupations box asks for education requirements. I thought it might be right to also state here that before the examinations one would need to have a bachelor's degree to qualify. I know this is the case in the UK and am reasonably sure the same goes for other countries. Any objections?-- Zoso Jade ( talk) 08:41, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
The page was recently edited to say that the Queens University in Belfast gives the most exemptions of all universities at 8. Evidence is needed that no other university gives 8 exemptions as I do not believe this claim to be true.
I did not do a degree that gives exemptions but I am pretty sure that if a pupil does sufficiently well at Cass Business School's Master's course they do not have to do any of the 8 CTs. This would appear to verify my point as all eight CTs are listed as covered on the course.
I have seen several of my workmates come in with 8 exemptions and none of them attended the Queen's University. Thanks-- Zoso Jade ( talk) 11:36, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
So says a new study, according to The Wall Street Journal. The survey was conducted by a company that seems non-notable, so I don't think it warrants mention in the article, but I thought I'd mention it here in case other editors disagree and want to update the article. — Malik Shabazz ( talk · contribs) 03:49, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
This sentence surprised me:
As I was reading it, I fully expected it was introducing the concept of reserving. I think of retrospective reinsurance as a very special case, perhaps worth mentioning in its own right, but I would prefer to see this paragraph expanded, first mentioning reserving, and optionally discussing some of the smaller examples. Obviously, I can make the change myself, but I'd like to see what others think, in case I'm missing something obvious.-- Sphilbrick ( talk) 17:45, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
I understand why more than one person deleted the link, but I disagree. I looked at it quickly, and didn't disagree. But I see it has been added back (with an explanation). I looked at it closer, and think it is an acceptable addition. I first thought it was a personal website, largely talking about the author's experiences therefore questionable. While some sections do talk about the author's experiences, they constitute a minority of the overall website, which does have decent and relevant information for someone interested in the actuarial field. I do understand it is questionable, but I think people should look through the site more careful before assuming it is simply a vanity site.-- SPhilbrick T 00:54, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
thanks for spending the time reading the website and provide some valuable feedback. The original motivation of this website is to provide a personal view & touch on the profession (to differentiate from those official actuarial society and association's website). thanks again and will do some revision on the grammer! Mulaohu ( talk) 15:33, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
External links in articles are subject to the guidelines at WP:EL, with the caveat that parsimony is desired, as per "External links to an article can be helpful to the reader, but they should be kept minimal, meritable, and directly relevant to the article." While I appreciate the effort Mulaohu put into the website, we already have links that allows readers to read personal anecdotes from actuaries—many more actuaries than a single person's perspective, and these are the BeAnActuary and Actuarial Outpost links. These allow the interested reader to get a much wider, if not truly global, perspective of the profession. Furthermore, under links to be avoided (and I understand this does not mean ipso facto forbidden) the eleventh entry is "Links to blogs, personal web pages and most fansites, except those written by a recognized authority (this exception is meant to be very limited; as a minimum standard, recognized authorities always meet Wikipedia's notability criteria for biographies)." Therefore, at this point, I think that the "IAmActuary" site is not appropriate for the article, both in and of itself and in contrast to the existing links. Thank you. -- Avi ( talk) 20:11, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
The difference between Mulaohu's site and the AO, is that the AO is frequented by actuaries from all over the world, including leaders of the various societies such as Bruce Schobel, Mary Pat Campbell, Glenn Myers, Arlie Proctor, and a bunch of others under their real names. There is extensive help for exams and actuarial basics too. It is a rich resource for actuaries, more so than a website reflecting a single person's opinion, at least in my opinion. -- Avi ( talk) 20:31, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
I looked at each of the five external links, to see if they met wp:EL. My position is that one does with no qualifications, one does, but raises issues, and three do not.
Post from Actuarial outpost
|
---|
words of love, soft and tender Posted 07-13-2009 at 11:38 AM by sweetiepie Updated 07-13-2009 at 08:19 PM by sweetiepie It's been a 4 day weekend. My phone, my laptop, and my pda are recharging. I'm recharging, drinking diet coke and playing Anno 1404, a retarded resource management game. I've been doing so for 3 hours and there's nothing on my mind except the providing my citizens with luxuries. I receive a super sweet text from the girl: "Now here's the part where I fall asleep without your arms around me. Should be simple enough, right? Millions of people do it every night." "ps take care of yourself this week darling" I don't know. I guess I should say something. So I keep her rhyme pattern and write. "It'll be easier not having to worry about your arm circulation or your pillow situation, or waking you on the way to the jon again and again." Oh hell why not. "Or being kept awake by the steady shock of your living beauty." "so fcking annoying you know? goodnight darling." She's a romantic and a Romantic, so I can get away with corny sht like 'living beauty'. If only it were true. I mean, she is beautiful, and her being alive, sleeping next to you demands respect. But it didn't keep me awake. We didn't spend our nights in hi-def, as far as I was concerned. I mean, once again, I hope she doesn't fall in love with me. She's not the type to, she hails from the sensualist side of the fence, but she wants me for my words, and words are dangerous. They want to be used. It's like being well hung. Only, if you're well hung, the most you'll bruise is a cervix. I have the power to cause cardiac damage. |
I'll emphasize that I doubt that this post is representative, but it's the first one I found.
I lean toward delete, but I'd like to hear other input first.
I don't think that the current description of an actuary provides a clear idea to people of what actuaries actually do. It merely links actuaries with financial risk - but what is it that actuaries actually do and what do companies pay them for? In the opening actuarial subject of my actuarial uni degree one of the first things they did was provide us with what they thought is the most comprehensive, clear and concise definition of an actuary: "An actuary is a professional who analyses risky cash flows to provide advice for the purpose of strategic decision making." I can find a broadly similar definition here: http://www.actuaries.org/ABOUT/Brochures/Actuarial_Profession_EN.pdf Utopial ( talk) 08:50, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
-- Avi ( talk) 01:37, 10 January 2010 (UTC)The future is uncertain. Some of the events that can happen are undesirable. "Risk" is the possibility that an undesirable event will occur. Actuaries are experts in:
*Evaluating the likelihood of future events
*Designing creative ways to reduce the likelihood of undesirable events
*Decreasing the impact of undesirable events that do occur.
Why is this section removed again and again?
Typically, an actuarial career progresses through several roles, depending on qualifications and experience, such as:
within an organisation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.225.218.253 ( talk) 05:43, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
Actuaries are a type of statisticians, and thus the article is in scope. -- Avi ( talk) 04:36, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
I think it is about time that the credentialing section be spun off into its own article, per summary style. Perhaps a brief mention of the largest systems worldwide (UK, US, Australia) can be mentioned, but it should be brief and lead to a new article. Any ideas for the name of the new article; something like " Actuarial credentials"? -- Avi ( talk) 22:44, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
It's about eight months, and no one has commented; shall I take that to mean overwhelming support? :-) -- Avi ( talk) 22:23, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
Can't we find a nicer pic than Katrina?
Say, a cemetery?
Or the Bills of Mortality? Or Lloyds of London? Meepbobeep ( talk) 11:06, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
I'm an actuary. My wife took a picture (that we have on our Flickr site) of me at work. There's me at the desk, a coputer screen showing a spreadsheet, stacks of Annual Statements and binders, and lots of other clutter. You could use that. 64.61.120.42 ( talk) 19:05, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
Here is a reference of sorts for the fact that Robert J. Randall Sr. was the first black actuary. FSA 1952
Sugarfoot1001 07:36, 25 August 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sugarfoot1001 ( talk • contribs)