This is an archive of past discussions with User:Edwardx. 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.
On 10 March 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ian Livingstone (property developer), which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that publicity-shy billionaire Ian Livingstone is married to a journalist for the celebrity gossip magazine OK!? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Have you seen this before? The whole article has been mirrored on German Wikipedia including crediting me (and you) as the editors. I don't know how they did it. I did not make those edits. Philafrenzy (talk) 11:09, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
That's a new concept to me too. No wonder your edit count goes up so quickly. Having said that, it looks like I've "edited" as much or more on German Wikipedia - [1]Edwardx (talk) 11:20, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
They clearly have some sort of import facility. My only worry is I won't get my royalties for that work... Oh, wait... Philafrenzy (talk) 11:23, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
I don't know anything about such translation but am a keen cyclist and so took a look at the picture. It's remarkable how the artist managed to make the original sketches completely incomprehensible. Kinda like what happens to a Wikipedia article if you don't keep an eye on it. :) FYI, note that there's a Tweed Run coming up on 18 April and that's more my style - not so new-fangled. Andrew D. (talk) 13:32, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
Don't knock it, they invented "force lines", or claimed to have done, crucial to the depiction of speed and power. Not that you get much of either on a Tweed Run. Philafrenzy (talk) 13:46, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
For some years, I've known that most of the edits credited to me on de.wp were transwikid. Edits actually made by me whilst visiting a page on de.wp total approximately 11. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:59, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
How do they do it and credit the original author? I suppose it is flattering but I am not sure they should really be saying that we made those edits in that language when we didn't? Philafrenzy (talk) 22:07, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
OK, it's one of those special permissions I don't have (i.e. almost all of them). They are still translating the articles though aren't they, so it is not our words as such. I may sue. Philafrenzy (talk) 00:03, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
Is there a specific reference somewhere to know his nationality? He may have multiple nationalities--I am not sure yet. Btw, I have changed his estimated wealth in the infobox as per the Hollywood Reporter article--not sure why it was much lower? Please reply on my talkpage. Thank you.Zigzig20s (talk) 23:38, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
STRL 2014 has "Alki David and the Leventis family" at £1.4bn (added to article). Multiple nationalities is indeed very possible - that sort of money opens many doors... Edwardx (talk) 11:38, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
Looks broadly okay, but it seems to be ongoing, so maybe best to wait a bit. Looking at the editor's contributions, it doesn't look like a WP:COI situation. Anyway, I started the page, so it's mine, not yours! (haha, you did almost all of the hard work) Edwardx (talk) 18:15, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
Well, if you want to create some of those red links, go ahead! I rephrased one sentence. I'm working on the impoverished heiress Francesca.Zigzig20s (talk) 18:36, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
Maybe a few more redlinks than I would ideally like, but all look like they could survive AfD, so no reason to remove them. As for starting articles, I already have a looooong list to do! Edwardx (talk) 10:43, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
The family is worth $60 billion, but alas, she's not a billioanire in her own right. Maybe when her father dies? Edwardx (talk) 12:14, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
That's not really how old money works. She's probably included in the family trust fund. After a few hundred millions, money becomes fictional as it's all tied up in investments. One has to live below one's means to meet philanthropic commitments. It can be difficult. (Don't even get me started about horses, houses, taxes...) Anyway, she is Chairman now.Zigzig20s (talk) 12:24, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
But you still have to have once been "self sufficient" in order to claim according to our article. In other words, if you have always been poor, forget it, its probably your fault anyway. Philafrenzy (talk) 15:16, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
Fun to watch her speech over lunch today. Tbh it was fairly interesting--they have open offices, call their employees 'associates,' etc. Clearly, I have too much time on my hands and perhaps the Mars family should hire me to keep me occupied!Zigzig20s (talk) 14:56, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
The matriarch must have spent it all on her beautiful Chanel suits. Looks like Victoria B. Mars does have an impact on my life after all. Even though I don't consume Mars products, she might be responsible for the extortionate price of the 75% cocoa organic chocolate bars I sometimes devour. At least it's all going towards saving the Galapagos Islands...I don't feel so bad now.Zigzig20s (talk) 17:46, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
Unlike those who "made it all themselves", most wealthy heirs like to keep a low profile. You could always write to her or Mars. Low-end chocolate is always the wrong choice - not enjoyable and it's bad for you. Much better to eat a smaller amount of the good stuff. Couldn't afford the Galapagos when I was in Ecuador. Maybe one day... Edwardx (talk) 15:02, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
I've noticed that you've been creating a plethora of articles around this subject. I had no idea that the alleged scam was so huge. Maybe because Max hasn't mentioned it yet. Perhaps Max needs to get Mitch Feierstein on again soon - his second half interviews are always entertaining and illuminating. We might have to wait until the trials to see if any of them made it to billionaire. Oh wait, this isn't China. Edwardx (talk) 21:01, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Our coverage of this sort of topic really is pathetic. There just aren't the editors with the knowledge or time for it. The people that do know about it have more sense than to do what we do. Philafrenzy (talk) 21:09, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
I agree, but if I understand Edwardx's views correctly, he is of the opinion that being a billionaire is inherently notable. I am sure he will correct me if those are not his views. My view is that even if they are not inherently notable, they are very unlikely in practice not to be notable. So unlikely as to make it not a useful exercise to exclude the few that have billions but have made no impact otherwise. Philafrenzy (talk) 00:06, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
Forbes have articles on all of them. Most billionaires have coverage in numerous sources. Only the Chinese ones and some low profile heirs can be challenging. Branson's good deeds are overrated - he's just another rent-seeker nowadays. 2325 - new ones are appearing faster than I can write articles. Is this a new golden age of capitalism? Why am I not feeling the trickle-down? Anyway, the top 500 worldwide now all have articles. I might have to give up the day job to cover the rest. And yes, it seems a bit arbitrary not to include the rare few that are simply ultra-low profile heirs. Edwardx (talk) 00:14, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
I'm hoping many will already have articles. Agreed, it is doable, especially if I cut back on real work. And it would be funny if I end up broke in the process. Edwardx (talk) 00:27, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
Interesting you say that - my current reading is "Focus: The Hidden Driver of Excellence". If I could only be single-minded, I might soon be #2326. Edwardx (talk) 00:39, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
Well there has to be some economic payoff for the focus doesn't there? And you have to choose the right thing to focus on. Philafrenzy (talk) 00:44, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
Hello. May I ask you to pay attention to Victor Vargas's page please? I had to revert some new edits, whereby lots of in-line referenced info was removed for no reason, and some unreferenced info was added instead. Bizarre. The account who did it only edited Vargas's page.Zigzig20s (talk) 20:40, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
Added to my watchlist (already 3,300 items, so what's one more?). There's been similar trouble with Greek billionaires. Maybe some folks aren't feeling the trickle down and are taking to vandalism instead. Edwardx (talk) 22:35, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
Thank you. They don't exactly practise Reaganomics in Venezuela...They are congregants of the Church of Socialism... Big government takeover of individual freedom through extortionate taxes, maximum regulations, and wink-wink, nudge-nudge cronyism...Perhaps we ought to consider "liberating" them. It almost became a thing in the good old days. But I'm glad Venezuela has a polo player. His mother might be notable enough to have her own article; it would probably make the feminists on Wikipedia very happy.Zigzig20s (talk) 22:53, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
On 1 April 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article God Nisanov, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that God is a billionaire property developer? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/God Nisanov. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
I was unable to find any of his obituaries, which I find rather odd. One would think there would be one in the NYTimes and the Washington Post at least. I wonder if he shared his father's views on diversity. You could suggest the DYK if you wanted.Zigzig20s (talk) 09:15, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
On 3 April 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Chris Lazari, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that billionaire London property developer Chris Lazari emigrated from Cyprus at 16 with just £20? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Chris Lazari. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
My name is Paulo Aragão and I'm third year Publishing, Journalism and Media student at Middlesex University. I was in your guest lectures with Stefan. I'm doing a video reportage for my dissertation on Youth Employment Opportunities in Media and I was wondering if you are able to do an interview?
The aim for my creative project (short video) is to explore the expectations of third year students (almost graduate) of employment opportunities in the media field.
I have interviewed students from the school of media and I would like to interview you in order to show your opinion and recommendations to young people like me to succeed in this competitive field.
Paulo, I'm visiting Middlesex later this month for your final session about Wikipedia with Stefan. I will email him to confirm the date, and I would be happy to do a video interview before or after that session. Edwardx (talk) 09:32, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
My guess is probably not, as they would hardly need to be selling it for the money would they? Looks very nice. Edwardx (talk) 09:44, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
DYK for Theo Müller
On 5 April 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Theo Müller, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that since Theo Müller inherited Müller in 1971, it has gone from employing just four people to over 20,000? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Theo Müller. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
I can't say the same. I took advantage of the new pension rules to cash everything in and spent it all on scratch cards and gin. Now I have to work until I am 100. Philafrenzy (talk) 21:04, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
Luxembourg Freeport
I haven't forgotten it. I have an article from The Times that I cut out. Too busy with other offshore shenanigans to get to it yet. Philafrenzy (talk) 22:18, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
No rush, still have to do the QPQ. Besides, you've already done enough to merit a co-credit. It was The Times article that got me started, but there is more than can be added. Plus I should start articles about the facilities in Geneva and Singapore. Always too much to be done. Edwardx (talk) 22:26, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
I will look into it. I am familiar with the story. I haven't met Bouvier, but I've certainly known about freeports for years and find them intriguing. I hope this won't turn into an attack page.Zigzig20s (talk) 22:57, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
The whole freeport thing is poorly covered on WP, like many business topics. I've no intention of creating an attack page, but things can be hijacked by others. The page does need something added about Bouvier denying the allegations. And his chief accuser Rybolovlev is hardly a saint - his recent high-profile divorce has been rather "combative". Edwardx (talk) 23:05, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Rybolovlev may very well be the underwriter of all the fantastic Russian-themed philanthropic events in Monaco this year... He seems like a wonderful person.Zigzig20s (talk) 23:45, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
We should be focusing on London-based hedge funds (unrelated to Bouvier of course)! I am trying to understand this city better.Zigzig20s (talk) 06:25, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
Do you know if there is a way to have access to this through Wikipedia? For example, I have access to Jstor thanks to Wikipedia, as you do; is there a similar thing for this? Apparently he designed Trevor Square; I think he needs a Wikipedia article!Zigzig20s (talk) 10:05, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
The map takes a bit of getting used to, but it's not that hard. A good one to join is City of Westminster Libraries. All you need is proof of address anywhere in the UK. And you can use LBKC and LBHF libraries too with a Westminster card. I'm a member of several London libraries. There are so many London buildings and streets that need articles. It could be a full-time job, if only someone would pay for it. Edwardx (talk) 17:48, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Does the Wikimedia Foundation not have a fundraising department? Perhaps some of those philanthropists wouldn't mind donating a bit...Zigzig20s (talk) 06:20, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
WMUK has a full-time fundraiser, so WMF must have at least one. Yes, how about a million for every time we mention philanthropy rather then tax avoidance? Edwardx (talk) 10:41, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
I thought taxation was theft? Philanthropy is a form of self-tax. On a less political note, if you want to expand Ken Costa, feel free to do so. Time for a stroll in the sun...Zigzig20s (talk) 11:17, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
Thank you. I will have to buy it--do feel free to send me a reminder then. Ruffer sounds like a nice man btw--just watched a couple of his youtube videos before lunch. Too sunny outside to stay in and significantly expand the page today though!Zigzig20s (talk) 11:10, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you have a one-year subscription to Newspapers.com through the Wikipedia Library. This is a brief update, to remind you about that access:
Please make sure that you can still log in to your Newspapers.com account. If you are having trouble let me know.
Remember, if you find this source useful for your Wikipedia work, to include citations with links on Wikipedia. Links to partner resources are one of the few ways we can demonstrate usage and demand for accounts to our partners. The greater the linkage, the greater the likelihood a useful partnership will be renewed. Also, keep in mind that part of Newspapers.com is open access via the clipping function. Clippings allow you to identify particular articles, extract them from the original full sheet newspaper, and share them through unique URLs. Wikipedia users who click on a clipping link in your citation list will be able to access that particular article, and the full page of the paper if they come from the clipping, without needing to subscribe to Newspapers.com. For more information about how to use clippings, see http://www.newspapers.com/basics/#h-clips .
Do you write unusual articles using this partner's sources? Did access to this source create new opportunities for you in the Wikipedia community? If you have a unique story to share about your contributions, let me know and we can set up an opportunity for you to write a blog post about your work with one of our partner's resources.
Finally, we would greatly appreciate it if you filled out this short survey. Your input will help us to facilitate this particular partnership, and to discover what other partnerships and services the Wikipedia Library can offer.
Thanks, at least the two socks have been blocked now. Should we go around and revert en-mass? Some of the edits were useful, but the money related ones were all un-sourced, in that they changed figures without updating the sources. I tried looking at the Forbes Magazine source/s, but couldn't find support there, even for the number of 'Greek' billionaires, at List of Greeks by net worth for example (I only got 3 'Greek" billionaires). All the socks' edits there add up to this!
Very good question! Looking at how persistent this/these editor(s) has/have been, it seems quite possible that we haven't seen the last of them. Agreed that they have added some useful stuff, but with so many edits and no edit summaries, it is quite difficult to unravel the changes. As for a motiviation for inflating the net worth and/or creating all of these "new" Greek billionaires, it is not clear to me. However, if we have net worth numbers in BLPs, we do need a source. Forbes is the leading source, but there is also Bloomberg and indeed any mention of "billionaire" in a WP:RS should suffice.
Perhaps we should look at each "billionaire" on a case-by-case basis, and then strike them from a master list? Edwardx (talk) 11:33, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
Agree likely we'll see them again. Possibly the number depends on your definition of Greek, like birthplace vs. nationality. Or I may not know how to use the Forbes site correctly! You have to select what you want to see as it's an 'interactive' listing. Note George Bobolas and Dimitris Copelouzos (at CSD now) were created by the sock-master.
Hi. Is there a way through Wikipedia to have a free online subscription to The Times? I would like to read this and I'm sure many other articles would be extremely useful to expand Wikipedia.Zigzig20s (talk) 15:20, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
Sadly not. Try a Waitrose loyalty card. Free newspaper when you spend £5 (£10 weekends), including the cost of the newspaper. Philafrenzy (talk) 17:13, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
Philafrenzy: Thank you. I am not sure how we could read this article. We are trying to create more articles about London-based hedge funds btw, in case you are interested.Zigzig20s (talk) 19:02, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
I see Eddie hired Russ Abbot and Bobby Davro for his birthday party. I assume all the local string quartets were booked up. Philafrenzy (talk) 09:17, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
Lol, that is precisely why I'd like to work with a few other people: (hedge) fund managers seem very dull, but they (and their companies/investments) are critical to understanding how this city is run. Plus their reach is global. They do sound a bit provincial when it goes, "his great-great-grandfather was educated at Eton College...", but that is England for you! I take short breaks by working on rags-to-riches stories about Holocaust survivors who moved to the US and made it big, and did not go to Groton at all...but I really should be focusing on England entirely now that I live here.Zigzig20s (talk) 10:14, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
My best guess is that hedge fund billionaires want to appear as dull as possible, as they neither need nor want the publicity. However, the role that hedge funds, HFT and algorithmic trading play in shaping global financial markets, and the wider taxation and political landscape continues to grow. Edwardx (talk) 12:06, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
My best guess would be that they don't care whether other people think them boring. Being very rich or very poor is quite freeing I would think. Philafrenzy (talk) 12:18, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
If you are poor there is the freedom to get rickets, to starve and to sleep in a cardboard box. If you are rich there is the freedom to commit any crime and serve only probation or a few years in an open prison while your money is waiting for you outside. It's exactly the same thing, I think you will agree. Philafrenzy (talk) 12:36, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
Lol, I do not agree. I do feel like most hedge fund managers would benefit from more/better PR. Some of them do that through philanthropy.Zigzig20s (talk) 13:05, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
I know! At least hedge funds don't get bailed by the state (if we leave aside LTCM), although with their often huge leverage they do massively up the total volume of debt thus making collapse/bailout of banks more likely. And they can play an important role in price discovery. But I'm confident that the enormous tax breaks and advantages enjoyed by hedgies and private equity far exceed any philanthropy. Read some David Cay Johnston. Edwardx (talk) 13:34, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
Nothing to do with socialism, I just want "free" markets to be competitive markets. Far too often they are rigged and oligopolistic. Pease isn't rich enough to interest me - she needs a better tax advisor. Edwardx (talk) 14:07, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
This is a call for free markets and greater regulation at the same time I think which leaves us guessing about where Edward's true allegiances lie, which here is probably a good thing, though he may spend a long time in the voting booth on election day. I predict long delays in his constituency while he decides how to vote. Philafrenzy (talk) 09:56, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
That is understandable--the blessed Conservatives are now trying to sound left-wing in order to win votes, but that's bound to confuse the electorate and pave the way for The Road to Serfdom! Less statism, more private governance, please.Zigzig20s (talk) 10:43, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
User:Philafrenzy: I asked the help at Waitrose earlier today. They don't give a free FT unfortunately, just The Times and a few other newspapers...I only have patience for the FT. I used to read The Telegraph (which would be free), but it has become so gossipy and thus rather dull...Zigzig20s (talk) 21:16, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Yes, pity about the FT but you can rotate between the Times, Telegraph and Guardian. Gives a reasonable spread I would have thought. The Telegraph is particularly strong on WW2 military obits covered nowhere else. Then you have The Guardian for the perspective of people who live off other people's taxes (but I appreciate their Snowden work). Philafrenzy (talk) 21:21, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
I find WW2 a little boring, and of course very sad--and I don't need sadness in my Clueless life. I am only interested in the rags-to-riches stories of Holocaust survivors who ended up as magnates and philanthropists, usually in BH or Bel Air...I love the FT because they give so many details about specific individuals and companies impacting our lives in so many ways every day; perfect for my alleged OCD. But I don't have time to read everything every day. So many details pass me by; it is a little cruel...Zigzig20s (talk) 21:34, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Yes, my dream of "finishing" the internet keeps getting ruined by people adding new pages. I can read the Guardian and Telegraph online for free; at Waitrose I normally go for the free Times. Plus I like the Chess and some of the other puzzles. Apparently for many/most of those who lived through it, WW2 was the most exciting part of their lives (okay, maybe just those who survived more or less unscathed). Edwardx (talk) 22:02, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
A lot of people enjoyed the war as class and sexual barriers broke down, and many people enjoyed the killing and the freedom from moral constraints according to reliable research, though nobody likes to mention that part now. Philafrenzy (talk) 22:16, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
As a zionist, I feel extremely uncomfortable with the direction of this thread. Six million Jews were murdered by the Nazis. There was nothing "enjoyable" about it.Zigzig20s (talk) 00:09, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Nobody said that anyone was right to enjoy it and nobody is denying the millions of deaths, but there is no doubt I think that some people on both sides did enjoy the war, either because they enjoyed killing or for other reasons such as the excitement of combat. Honest first hand accounts of soldiers from both World Wars make this clear. Philafrenzy (talk) 00:31, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
.svg){kind=small}
