Talk:Ronn Torossian: Difference between revisions
m Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Ronn Torossian/Archive 2) (bot |
m →Luxury Real Estate Purchase: extra brackets |
||
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 41: | Line 41: | ||
::: Sorry, I was just trying to impress the guy :P. I thought the NY Daily News was an OK source? I checked it out at the RSN and found nothing untoward. -- [[User:Diannaa|Diannaa]] ([[User talk:Diannaa|talk]]) 21:54, 20 February 2014 (UTC) |
::: Sorry, I was just trying to impress the guy :P. I thought the NY Daily News was an OK source? I checked it out at the RSN and found nothing untoward. -- [[User:Diannaa|Diannaa]] ([[User talk:Diannaa|talk]]) 21:54, 20 February 2014 (UTC) |
||
::::Per comments below on a living person and a tabloid source removed <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/165.254.85.130|165.254.85.130]] ([[User talk:165.254.85.130|talk]]) 22:40, 20 February 2014 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
::::Per comments below on a living person and a tabloid source removed <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/165.254.85.130|165.254.85.130]] ([[User talk:165.254.85.130|talk]]) 22:40, 20 February 2014 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
||
:::::@[[User:Demiurge1000]] Actually, the NYDN source is perfectly fine. It ''looks'' gossippy, but it actually quotes both the plaintiff's and the defendant's respective attorneys, so I don't think there's any doubt that there's a libel suit happenin'. [[User:Mosmof|Mosmof]] ([[User talk:Mosmof|talk]]) 02:48, 21 February 2014 (UTC) |
|||
Think to yourself - if you were reading the biography of some business who died in the 1950s, would you be in the slightest bit interested in how much his house cost and who he bought it from? Encyclopedic content and newspaper content aren't the same thing, although they do overlap. --[[User:Dweller|Dweller]] ([[User talk:Dweller|talk]]) 22:45, 20 February 2014 (UTC) |
Think to yourself - if you were reading the biography of some business who died in the 1950s, would you be in the slightest bit interested in how much his house cost and who he bought it from? Encyclopedic content and newspaper content aren't the same thing, although they do overlap. --[[User:Dweller|Dweller]] ([[User talk:Dweller|talk]]) 22:45, 20 February 2014 (UTC) |
||
::::: Spoken like you are a rational person. So, if we look back on the 1950's, how would the 1st paragraph which says he worked for previous Prime Ministers reconcile with this - Hence, it doesn't belong: |
::::: Spoken like you are a rational person. So, if we look back on the 1950's, how would the 1st paragraph which says he worked for previous Prime Ministers reconcile with this - Hence, it doesn't belong: |
Revision as of 02:49, 21 February 2014
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ronn Torossian article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7Auto-archiving period: 91 days |
Biography C‑class | |||||||
|
This article was nominated for deletion on 2007 November 15. The result of the discussion was keep. |
This article was nominated for deletion on 3 October 2008. The result of the discussion was keep. |
Jeffrey Goldberg
Content should be removed. A: is a blog. B: Contrasts significantly with comments above saying Torossian trains Israeli government officials and has worked for 2 prime ministers and 2 Mayors of Jerusalem. C: Is a single biased opinion of a living person. Goldberg is known for his left-wing opinions. Should be removed violates BLP.62.219.165.186 (talk) 20:41, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Content further seems mean-spirited and not in line with Wiki of living persons. If this is relevant so include items of right-wing bloggers calling him genius. 62.219.165.186 (talk) 20:44, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
- What seems to be the trouble? Nomoskedasticity (talk) 23:38, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
- The IP has been community banned from editing Wikipedia, so no actions will be taken on anything he requests. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 23:40, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
- He is editing from an unusual location, but I agree with Demiurge; it is banned user Babasalichai. -- Dianna (talk) 04:10, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
- Comment regarding the issue please as per wiki rules. Dont see anything regarding that IP on so-called community ban. Comments regarding Goldberg seem accurate and so should be removed per BLP and libel issues. 62.90.147.224 (talk) 07:10, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
- Every sentence you write makes it clearer, so don't bother. Qwyrxian (talk) 10:59, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
- Comment regarding the issue please as per wiki rules. Dont see anything regarding that IP on so-called community ban. Comments regarding Goldberg seem accurate and so should be removed per BLP and libel issues. 62.90.147.224 (talk) 07:10, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Armenian surname?
His surname is Armenian. Is he a Jew of Armenian descent? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Learnedhelplessnessbullshit (talk • contribs) 23:03, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
Company Legal Claims
Would not be relevant for comments on his personal page. This incident is already mentioned on Torossian company page is not about him personal. 165.254.85.130 (talk) 22:09, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Luxury Real Estate Purchase
A bio page on someone that does not include a $8.2 Million real estate condo purchase does not make sense at all. Its important in a bio which summarizes key points in a persons life - and even more so considering whom it was purchased from. − [1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.254.85.130 (talk) 17:34, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
- We are not a tabloid or a newspaper, and just because something is newsworthy or can be sourced does not mean that it gets included in biographies on this wiki. Several editors have reverted you, all of them knowledgeable administrators of this site, so please don't re-add the content again or you could be facing a block for edit warring. Thanks, -- Diannaa (talk) 20:00, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
- Administrators ain't special, remember. We do also need a better source for the libel thing than NYDailyNews :P --Demiurge1000 (talk) 21:42, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
- Sorry, I was just trying to impress the guy :P. I thought the NY Daily News was an OK source? I checked it out at the RSN and found nothing untoward. -- Diannaa (talk) 21:54, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
- Per comments below on a living person and a tabloid source removed — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.254.85.130 (talk) 22:40, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
- @User:Demiurge1000 Actually, the NYDN source is perfectly fine. It looks gossippy, but it actually quotes both the plaintiff's and the defendant's respective attorneys, so I don't think there's any doubt that there's a libel suit happenin'. Mosmof (talk) 02:48, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
- Per comments below on a living person and a tabloid source removed — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.254.85.130 (talk) 22:40, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
- Sorry, I was just trying to impress the guy :P. I thought the NY Daily News was an OK source? I checked it out at the RSN and found nothing untoward. -- Diannaa (talk) 21:54, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
- Administrators ain't special, remember. We do also need a better source for the libel thing than NYDailyNews :P --Demiurge1000 (talk) 21:42, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
Think to yourself - if you were reading the biography of some business who died in the 1950s, would you be in the slightest bit interested in how much his house cost and who he bought it from? Encyclopedic content and newspaper content aren't the same thing, although they do overlap. --Dweller (talk) 22:45, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
- Spoken like you are a rational person. So, if we look back on the 1950's, how would the 1st paragraph which says he worked for previous Prime Ministers reconcile with this - Hence, it doesn't belong:
Atlantic Monthly writer Jeffrey Goldberg called him "the most disreputable flack in New York", particularly criticizing his representation of what Goldberg called the "lunatic fringe" of Israeli politics.[24] The New York Times said he has a reputation as "an aggressive publicist prone to sending off vitriolic e-mails."[25] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.254.85.130 (talk) 23:38, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
- Check out a featured article on an American personality from the 1950s. Does it mention such harsh critiques from reliable sources like the NYT? Why yes, it does. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 23:43, 20 February 2014 (UTC)