Talk:Vivek Ramaswamy

New edit request

I have one request as a COI editor at this time.

Current wording: In the career section there is a sentence that says "“Ramaswamy worked at QVT Financial from 2007 to 2014, where he was a partner and co-managed the firm’s biotech portfolio.”

Requested addition: After this sentence I'd like to add context to his work there: "During this time, he invested in companies developing antiviral drugs, including for the cure of hepatitis C."

I look forward to hearing feedback. FinalFrontier.003 (talk) 07:24, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

References

Reply 16-APR-2019

  Edit request declined  

• The provided sources state that the hepatitis C drug was developed through the efforts of 4 entities: William Symonds, Pharmasset, Gilead, and the investments of QVT — of which Ramaswamy was an analyst/partner. The request posits Ramaswamy as partner in QVT as the sole justification for being able to attach his name to that drug's development, while simultaneously discounting (in the requested prose) the roles of the other entities by not mentioning them. Looking at the sources for verification, only Forbes provides somewhat of a timeline — and from that, the salience with which Ramaswamy inbues his role is not evident. That's because his efforts were not in isolation — they occurred concomitant to other entities' roles. A claim to have bankrolled the cure for hep C alone, as this claim is worded, requires exceptional sourcing to verify it.

Regards,  Spintendo  09:38, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

• I have been asked to update the page I previously edited. The paid relationship was previously declared and remains on my userpage. The changes will primarily be the addition of new material, including additional publications and expanded book sections, including critical reception. Everything will be extensively sourced. I may also do some reformatting of the Career section for clarity.:

Jhofferman (talk) 06:18, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi, you will need to request changes here for review and use the {{request edit}} tag to have someone review them. I am marking this as addressed for now since no clear edit has been proposed from what I can tell. Best, Spencer^T•C 22:33, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

References

Religion

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Is Ramaswamy a practicing Hindu? I just read an article that mentioned that he is a vegetarian (as many Hindus are), but the article didn’t explicitly state his religious affiliation. 2600:1014:B05F:669E:84E7:38D6:A1FE:60F3 (talk) 00:44, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

I did some digging and found that he spoke at a gala held by a Hindu advocacy group. However, one of the other speakers at the event is Muslim, so that doesn’t necessarily prove Ramaswamy is a Hindu. 2604:2D80:6984:3800:0:0:0:EBA2 (talk) 22:47, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Per Wikipedia policy, we will not make any statements regarding Ramaswamy's faith without the relevant source - a direct statement from the man himself. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:56, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

I see that we now have a source in which Ramaswamy self-identifies as Hindu by faith. [1] AndyTheGrump (talk) 05:16, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Removal of Maintenance Template

Thanks to the efforts of the several contributors who revised this page in the last few days, I believe it now conforms to Wikipedia standards. Hence I'm removing the maintenance template. If there is disagreement about this, or if I've overstepped my bounds, please let me know and take the necessary remedial action. Jhofferman (talk) 20:37, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Frankly, I would have to suggest that a paid contributor who recently made this edit, [2], with what appears to be a misleading edit summary, isn't particularly well placed to make assertions regarding 'Wikipedia standards'. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:33, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, just saw this, and you're right about that edit. I made it at the request of the client and had doubts about it at the time. I apologize for coming down on the wrong side of that one, and further apologize if I neglected to mention it in the summary. In general, I've made my best effort to adhere to standards and to be completely transparent about revisions. This included explaining repeatedly to the client that Wikipedia is not simply another marketing tool and that many of the things they wanted were not acceptable. Jhofferman (talk) 02:44, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

I suggest you inform your client that regardless of his wishes, Wikipedia contributors, paid or other wise, are obliged to comply with the relevant policies, and that contributors who repeatedly fail to do so are liable to be blocked and/or banned, possibly indefinitely. As for the edit concerned, I really don't see how the phrase could be seen as anything other than unsourced and essentially meaningless puffery. And regardless of what "cultural thought leader" is supposed to mean, we aren't going to take Ramaswamy's word for it that he is one. Given recent developments it is inevitable that this biography is going to come under increasing scrutiny, and if Ramaswamy thinks it necessary to pay someone to contribute here, he needs to understand that any contributions are on our terms. And subject to public scrutiny. AndyTheGrump (talk) 03:16, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

We are in agreement on "cultural thought leader." I was hired and began the revision before he declared his candidacy (which I found out about the same way as everyone else) and agreed to do it mostly because I had done a previous revision of the page. Aside from keeping an eye on the site to ensure that basic facts aren't changed (like his wife's name, which someone had altered), I've finished my work and am no longer being paid. FYI, there is a lot of daylight between his ideological positions and my own. I'm happy to leave further revisions and enhancements to others. Jhofferman (talk) 04:18, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

One last thing. This may sound like a joke, but it isn’t. If I can be of any assistance in terms of providing information or finding sources, please let me know. Jhofferman (talk) 08:43, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

If you know of any further RS providing biographical information that might be useful, you could list them here. Beyond that, I suspect that if Ramaswamy's candidacy bid gains any traction, there will be plenty of new sources, including ones taking a more critical look at his politics and career. As of now, coverage seems largely confined to sources who's politics align with his. Not that this is at all unusual for entrepreneurs, flavour-of-the-month political commentators etc. AndyTheGrump (talk) 11:40, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

Now that Vivek is a candidate for US President, it is important to know if his parents were US citizens at the time of his birth. If not, Vivek is not eligible to be President even though he was born in OhioSo please identify his parents' citizenship at the time of Vivek's birth Thank you 2601:8B:4500:A260:9968:FAB5:A712:B086 (talk) 22:12, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia doesn't engage in investigative journalism, or make assertions regarding eligibility to run for president. We leave that to the sources we cite. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:20, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

I re-added the maintenance template largely because the book review section is still largely unchanged from the paid contributor version that cites only positive portions of negative reviews. TulsaPoliticsFan (talk) 05:06, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Junior Tennis claims

The article has an unsourced statement that the subject was a nationally ranked junior tennis player. I attempted to confirm this by searching the internet and found no evidence that this is true. Interestingly, I found no evidence that he competed in high school or college tennis. https://www.ohsaa.org/sports/boystennis/past-results https://gocrimson.com/documents/2022/7/17/MTEN_Record_Book_2021-22.pdf While it is certainly possible that he did not compete for his schools, this would certainly merit investigation. 71.88.60.253 (talk) 15:22, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

This is now sourced to a New Yorker profile. Unless and until we see anything in WP:RS to the contrary, we must assume it is correct. AndyTheGrump (talk) 11:51, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

Why do you have to assume it. The New Yorker story cites no authority for it either and the internet is devoid of any supporting documentation. Does Wikipedia policy allow something to be taken as gospel because a PR team has repeated a claim over and over? 2601:182:B80:8F70:1420:B93F:DB51:8A87 (talk) 00:52, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

Journalist rarely cite their sources, and we have no expectation that they do so. And frankly, if this is a PR-team invention, it seems a rather trivial one. AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:22, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

Given the George Santos lies, I think that even trivial background lies are important. Thanks for your hard work. 24.151.28.11 (talk) 13:32, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

"Published Works" Section

Maybe it's just me, but the "Published Works" section of the article sounds very much like an advertisement for Ramaswamy's works. At the very least, I have never seen another person's Wikipedia page with their published works listed looking like how it does here 2603:6080:B207:AE70:138B:67C9:77A4:D40C (talk) 04:26, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

The section needs major work, along with the rest of the article. I'd move notable reviews from notable sources to the bio section where we talk about the books, cut less notable reviews, note the negative reviews instead of spinning them positively (like the current version), and then have a list of the books like we normally do for authors. TulsaPoliticsFan (talk) 05:19, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Given that the editor who added the book reviews admits to having been paid by Vivek Ramaswamy to contribute to his Wikipedia article hopefully another editor can come in and make it more neutral in content. 2603:6080:B207:AE70:138B:67C9:77A4:D40C (talk) 23:55, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Per this correct comment I tagged the article for maintenance with the paid contributions tag. TulsaPoliticsFan (talk) 18:16, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

It should probably be incorporated into the body, but it's not entirely uncommon for works to have subsections devoted to them that included commentary and reviews from peers (e.g. philosophers, historians). However those are usually balanced whereas the section here would prima facie have an undue amount of praise. ---- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 06:21, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, it's the fact that the reviews are only positive ones that concerns me. It seems very biased in Mr. Ramaswamy's favor. Looking at the articles history, it also seems like they were put in the article by a user who has admitted to being paid by Mr. Ramaswamy to write for him on Wikipedia. Which certainly doesn't help any bias concerns 2603:6080:B207:AE70:138B:67C9:77A4:D40C (talk) 17:55, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia manipulation

He has apparently paid at least one person to remove details about his Soros Fellowship from Wikipedia. This seems newsworthy, but I'm not sure where to include it. It calls into question the reliability of the entire article. Maybe some kind of protection is needed? https://www.mediaite.com/politics/exclusive-vivek-ramaswamy-paid-to-have-his-soros-fellowship-and-covid-era-role-scrubbed-from-wikipedia-page/ Davidmsterns (talk) 16:55, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

I came here to say the same thing and point this out. The page needs to be completely re-evaluated. conman33 (. . .talk) 17:24, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

We don't protect articles because of bad content, we rectify it. As for re-evaluation, I'd say it was ongoing. The article has changed substantially since the edits referred to in the Mediaite piece, in my opinion at least much for the better. Further impartial eyes on the article are of course a good thing though, and anyone is free to offer their opinions. AndyTheGrump (talk) 17:40, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

At least two paid contributors are noted here on at the top of the talk page and if we identify anymore we can list them here. However, if media outlets start reporting on the paid contributions we do have an issue of if that should be mentioned in the article. TulsaPoliticsFan (talk) 18:09, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, media outlets *are* reporting on it. This information is all contained in the Mediaite article cited above and has also now been reported on by Forbes, I've also seen mentions on MSNBC I think. What I find particularly problematic is the following

• the editor removed the mention of the subject being Hindu did so with the edit summary of "Deleted "Ramaswamy identifies as a Hindu" at subject's request" which indicates subject contacted the editor somehow but there is no record of this contact on the editor's talk page or elsewhere within Wikipedia. It is indicated by editor's user talk that they are a paid editor but that info was posted after the fact.
• Same editor removed the Soros Fellowship information with the edit summary of "Deleted extraneous material re fellowship".
• Same editor removed the Ohio COVID information with the edit summary of "Minor revision of description of Chapter Medicare and deletion of COVID Response Team service, at subject's request" which, again, indicates the subject of the article contacted this particular editor off-Wikipedia. The only issue I have with the source/the cite is its possibly biased reporting but, then again, I have been unable to find any listing of the members (either as individuals or corporations) of the state of Ohio's Covid Response Team so the issue of the information being deleted might be moot though the paid-editing/COI is possibly not. Shearonink (talk) 18:16, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

• I agree with Shearonink, but this isn't the best place to deal with any conflicts that editor "Jhofferman" as identified in the media, may have. See, e.g.: Exclusive: Vivek Ramaswamy Paid to Have His Soros Fellowship and Covid-Era Role Scrubbed from Wikipedia Page. --Bejnar (talk) 18:31, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

I think all of these have now been restored to the article citing the Forbes article about their removal. TulsaPoliticsFan (talk) 20:57, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

I added a short passage on the issue to the campaign section. Tried to keep it as neutral and brief as possible. --Woko Sapien (talk) 20:46, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

As this has now hit the media I've raised it at WP:ANI#User:Jhofferman accused of paid editing at Vivek Ramaswamy. Doug Weller talk 07:33, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

TulsaPoliticsFan on 25 March 2023 added at the talk-page top that Jhofferman was employed by Vivek Ramaswamy. I believe that was premature. One must assume that Jhofferman thought it was Vivek Ramaswamy, but is there confirmation from anywhere? Peter Gulutzan (talk) 14:29, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

He self declared the connection. I suppose @Jhofferman could have lied about the employment, but I thought with paid contributors the self declaration was enough to add the paid editor notice to alert other editors. I do have to admit I was not expecting a Forbes article when I added the template. If a self-declaration of paid editing is not enough to add the talk page template, what is the threshold for adding it? We're unlikely to get literal receipts from the editor so what is the line here? TulsaPoliticsFan (talk) 19:26, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

His campaign defends the edits, so that confirms they ordered them. "Vivek Ramaswamy Campaign Insists Wikipedia Revisions Weren’t A ‘Scrub’". Also, the WP article has "paid an editor to alter his Wikipedia page to appear more favorable to political conservatives before announcing his campaign by temporarily removing references". That implies it was meant to be a "temporary" removal. The Soros Foundation text was restored by this edit by another editor. The removal was only temporary in the sense that all of Wikipedia is temporary. So I have deleted that word as misleading. (I am not being paid by anyone to do this.) 27.96.195.3 (talk) 03:43, 5 May 2023 (UTC)