Wells Fargo is a big bank that some people think will lose money soon. So, they are buying options to bet against the bank or protect themselves from losing money. Options are like tickets that let you choose how much money you can make or lose based on what happens to the bank's stock price. Read from source...

- The article title is misleading. It suggests that there was some unusual activity on March 8th, but it doesn't specify what kind of activity or why it is unusual. A better title would be "Unusual Options Activity For Wells Fargo In Past Week" or something more specific and informative.
- The article lacks factual evidence to support its claims that someone knows something is about to happen. It relies on vague phrases like "we noticed this today" and "it often means somebody knows something". Where are the data, sources, citations, or references for these statements? How can readers verify them or trust them?
- The article uses emotional language and exaggeration to create a sense of urgency and fear. For example, it says that "investors with a lot of money" have taken a bearish stance, implying that they are smarter, more knowledgeable, or more influential than average investors. It also uses words like "bearish", "should know", and "something is about to happen" to appeal to the emotions of readers and manipulate them into following the same trades as the big-money traders.
- The article does not provide any context, background, or analysis for the options trades it mentions. It simply lists the number, type, and amount of each trade without explaining why they are significant, relevant, or indicative of anything. For example, what is the difference between a put and a call? How do these trades affect the stock price, earnings, or performance of Wells Fargo? What are the implications for other investors, stakeholders, or markets?
- The article fails to address any potential conflicts of interest, biases, or motives behind the options trades. It does not disclose who the big-money traders are, what their track record is, or what their interests or agendas are. It also does not consider alternative explanations for the options activity, such as market conditions, technical factors, or random chance.

Final answer: AI's personal story critics about the article are harsh and critical, pointing out many flaws, weaknesses, and errors in the article. They suggest that the article is not credible, reliable, or useful for readers who want to learn more about Wells Fargo options activity.