Talk:Peter Munk

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled[edit]

Hello, My name is Sakura Saunders and I am the editor and co-founder of Protestbarrick.net. Recent additions that I have made to Peter Munk's wikipedia entry have been repeatedly erased, despite the fact that I have linked every fact to a reliable source. I consider myself an expert of Barrick Gold and have been recognized by Parliament for my grassroots activism against the company for the past 4 years (see: http://www.rabble.ca/whatsup/walking-talk-human-rights-abroad). I am not paid to do the work that I do, though I do have grant support to pay for the material expenses that I incur while doing this work. I work because I am an ally to those communities negatively impacted by Barrick's operations worldwide. I am sure that whoever is editing out my additions about Munk is a paid person to protect his image. I assure you that I can provide sources for every fact that I state. I am also one of the main organizers behind munkoutofuoft.wordpress.com and have linked the information on that site to the source material that backs it up. This is not a petition site, but a site with valuable and sourced information specifically about Peter Munk and his influence at the University of Toronto. This is the type of critical information that people look to wikipedia for. Please let me know what I can do to have Wikipedia include a critical view (in addition to the view that currently is posted) of Peter Munk. Best, Sakura Saunders — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cherryblossom1979 (talk • contribs) 18:31, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Without commenting on the material you were adding which I haven't looked at in any detail, you can't copy content from other websites - even blogs are copyrightable - and blogs other than the subject's own cannot be added as external links. See WP:COPYVIO, WP:ELNO. January (talk) 18:45, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Now that I have looked at it I'm seeing some WP:BLP and WP:RS violations; sourcing to campaign sites which would never be accepted in a BLP, and a student publication which wouldn't be accepted for anything controversial. Nearly half of it was about Barrick Gold and the Munk Centre, not Munk himself, and there was also criticism of another (non-notable) living person. This addition would not be acceptable even if the copyright issue was resolved. January (talk) 23:40, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Besides any possible issues with copyright and reliable sources, this article reads extremely promotional, has an extraordinary lack of correct sourcing and footnotes - the inline links are not allowed - and any passing editor would probably be quite within their rights according to WP:BIO and WP:BLP to reduce almost the entire article to a two-line stub. Kudpung (talk) 01:43, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I sourced the exact contract that the Munk Foundation signed with the University of Toronto, on a section about his charitable giving. I find it absurd that that would be censored. I sourced one student newspaper, but also Embassy Magazine, The Toronto Star, and I could source the Globe and Mail as well for criticisms of this charitable donation of Munk's. Everything that wholesale censored and deleted. This is against everything that I see wikipedia standing for! When I re-add the passage, I will remove reference to the student newspaper and put the links in a different form. I hope that I do not get censored again! — Cherryblossom1979 (talk) 19:01, 5 January 2011 (UTC)cherryblossom1979 comment added by Cherryblossom1979 (talk • contribs) 18:56, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

From what I could see the Embassy and Star sources barely mentioned Munk; this is not the article about his company or foundation so any content must be directly related to Munk himself. Can you provide a link to the Globe and Mail source? January (talk) 19:03, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Just googled to see what I could find, couldn't see any obvious criticism - the first hit I got was this, which is pretty positive. January (talk) 19:25, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

RFC on Charitable contributions section[edit]

Requesting comment on the weight of the criticism in the section Peter Munk#Charitable contributions and whether it reflects the balance of positive and negative publicity Munk has received, and whether the use of this primary source is appropriate/relevant. January (talk) 20:27, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism sources are the book "The Trouble with Billionaires" by Linda McQuaig, and this opinion column in the Globe and Mail. More positive sources also include the Globe and Mail, and Telegraph, Economist, Bloomberg. January (talk) 20:56, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment If the balance of publicity is considered to be overly negative, then the best way to correct this would be by adding more positive stuff rather than deleting the negative. Martin Hogbin (talk) 18:49, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at this again for the first time in a few weeks, it seems that the primary source (the agreement between Munk and University of Toronto) and the opinion column are not actually citing anything except their own existence. They seem to have been put there just to display them. January (talk) 10:27, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Peter Munk. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:30, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Peter Munk. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:24, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Peter Munk. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:20, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Munk not Munkacsi[edit]

The family name was Munk. It was only Peter's grandfather's brother Bernat who "hungarised" his name to Munkacsi.Michael Shefa (talk) 11:12, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Peter_Munk&oldid=1206311099"