A Short and Distort scam involves short selling a stock while smearing a company with false rumors to drive the stock's price down.
Article and talk before redirect:
JzG also tried to delete it but an administrator undid it: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...ort_and_distort
90% of the talk page edits are Gary Weiss socks.
Half the article history is Gary Weiss socks and the other half is piperdown.
I present Gary Weiss talking to himself:
I've done some further editing to remove essay type material and OR, and remove non-RS website sources and links. I think care needs to be drawn in the pump and dump analogy, as pump and dumps involve valueless stocks while short and distort does not involve the equivalent undervalued stocks. --Samiharris 14:25, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Actually the expression does involve, or at least could involve, undervalued stocks. As I understand the term, and it is used so little that one cannot say with absolute certainty, it involves spreading of false rumors about a stock. Thus the stocks involved can be either undervalued or overvalued, but are a subject of lies.--Mantanmoreland 16:50, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
If you take out the OR, you are left with material cribbed from the Wired article and not much else. It seems to have been used by a regulator once. I can't find a reference to it on the SEC website. I'd suggest merging this with short (finance).--Mantanmoreland 17:57, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
I think that is a good idea. --Samiharris 15:02, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
I've removed the links that were just added back in. The Investopedia and Fraud Guides entries are essays that cite no examples of "short and distort" schemes but simply talk about it without citing their sources. Thus they are unverifiable and expressly prohibited by WP:EL, which prohibits links that provide "unverifiable research."
The American Spectator essay is not about short and distort. It makes one brief reference to "so-called short and distort" in an article on an unrelated subject (providing of information to the SEC to influence share prices). This is therefore a meaningless link for an article on this subject and provides no useful content for the reader. Please don't inflate the "external links" section by adding links that simply mention the subject of the article and provide no information on it.--Mantanmoreland 15:10, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
The Forbes link also essentially duplicates the Connecticut attorney general testimony link, as both quote the same person saying the same thing. --Samiharris 15:21, 7 July 2007 (UTC)