Jump to content

Talk:Mark Zuckerberg

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 76.98.40.217 (talk) at 18:33, 30 October 2010 (→1 in 14 people in the World have a Facebook Account is inaccurate: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

September 2006

"On Septemeber 5th 2006, Zuckerberg the son of a whore created a mini feed, encouraging stalkers everywhere to set forth on a global rampage." - Definitely not a neutral point of view (loudestnoise : talk) 05 September 2006

October 2005

There's currently not much noteworthy about him except for his creation of Facebook. Besides, the main facebook article mentions everything currently on this page about him. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 169.229.99.156 (talk • contribs) 01:43, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

July 2006

He is absolutely noteworthy enough to have his own stub. Someone needs to track down the New Yorker's piece on Zuckerberg that was printed in its May 15, 2006 edition. I remember the article saying that he was offered something in the hundreds of millions for the site. Anyone who has been offered hundreds of millions of dollars for anything is worth a "stub" on Wikipedia. [[1]]

Criticism Section

Why isn't their a criticism section? He has drawn a decent amount of attention, such as banning user accounts when they post negatively about him. I am sure their is also publicity of him and not facebook.108.7.234.223 (talk) 05:32, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]


I agree, they ban and delete without telling you the reason. I did nothing wrong and went to log in one day and my account was GONE! My hubby and I and friends have all left FB because of this crap. And it IS crap. Hope your stupid movie tanks---Zuckerberg. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.157.223.50 (talk) 15:26, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Stuff about his facebook activities are in the facebook section, and Wikipedia is not a forum about your opinions about Mark Zuckerberg. Jasonxu98 (talk) 01:01, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New Yorker's 2010 article about Zuckerberg

Plenty of interesting and relevant details there: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/09/20/100920fa_fact_vargas?currentPage=all

$6.9 Billion = 24% of $11 Billion (Facebook's valuation)?

Mark Zuckerberg's personal wealth was announced last week at being about $6.9 billion. If Facebook is currently valuated at $11 Billion then how does Mark's 24% stake equal his personal wealth (which I'm sure comes directly from Facebook). Does he take 24% of the estimated $800 million annual every year since Facebook started generating income?96.229.146.58 (talk) 19:49, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from 12amrambler, 28 September 2010

{{edit semi-protected}} The religion of Mark Zuckerberg's parents is not pertinent and should be omitted. In Wikipedia I have found that biographies of other persons in regard to the religion of their parents or the subject of biography is only mentioned if the subject of biography or the subjects parents are Jewish. Please correct this inconsistency by changing "Zuckerberg was born in White Plains, New York and raised in Dobbs Ferry, New York. Zuckerberg's parents are Jewish,[3] but he considers himself an atheist" to: "Zuckerberg was born in White Plains, New York and raised in Dobbs Ferry, New York."


 Not done seems to be a relevant fact to his upbringing The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 15:43, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Zuckerberg willingly noted that he attended Temple Beth Abraham in Tarrytown, NY as a youth. Being Jewish is not only a religion, it is also an ethnicity that Zuckerberg obviously identifies as, considering his involvement in Alpha Epsilon Pi at Harvard, the Jewish fraternity, and his involvement with Hillel, a Jewish group on college campuses. http://www.facebook.com/q/What-synagogue-did-Mark-Zuckerberg-attend-while-growing-up-in-Dobbs-Ferry-New-York/446654356319?t=2&hid=68310606562 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.64.130.120 (talk) 13:03, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I find this paragraph to be weak because of the "but" conjuction: when one hears about a person that "he's Jewish", one doesn't think about that person's religion, but ethnicity. It's like saying "Zadie Smith's parents are Jamaican but she considers herself an atheist"; there is no logical connection. I would rephrase it by separating the two sentences.Florin zeitblom (talk) 16:04, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jewish can refer to religion or ethnicity. Thus, how one interprets someone saying that someone else is Jewish can vary. It's even more attenuated here because the article doesn't say Zuckerberg is Jewish, but he considers himself an atheist. It says his parents are Jewish, but he considers himself an atheist. I don't see any problem with it - other than these kinds of statements in Wikipedia articles always seem to generate a lot of controversy.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:21, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with you that depends on interpretation, but I think that "ethnicity point of view" prevails on Wikipedia; please, take a look at articles on Zadie Smith, Raymond Aron, Barack Obama, Albert Camus, Fatih Akin etc.: they all specify parents' ethnicity, not religion, so one has the right to assume that's exactly the word "Jewish" from here is referring to; besides, maybe Zuckerberg's parents are atheists too, so in this case this "but conjunction" would make no sense. It's not a big deal, however.Florin zeitblom (talk) 16:44, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sure I could find articles on Wikipedia where Jewish refers to religion, so I don't think there's a "prevailing" view. However, I agree with you that Zuckerberg's parents may be non-believing Jews. But the "but" (smile) still doesn't bother me much.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:54, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The Oct. 20, 2010, Jewish Journal says he "might be the most eligible Jewish bachelor in the world" who "met his real-life girlfriend...Priscilla Chan, on erev Shabbat at an AEPi party...." (If the person who contributed the "but" is around: Did you do so in part because of the subject's rumored interfaith marriage-to-be (someday)?) IAC, due to such sources, I'll remove the controversial "but."--Hodgson-Burnett's Secret Garden (talk) 17:45, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Zuckerberg is color-blind?

Zuckerberg is color-blind? And it is because of that Facebook is blue in color? Although the news comes from a CNN post, I don't know whether it is appropriate for the article. If anyone feels so, please do add it. See this for further details. — Finemann (talk) 20:56, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The text from much of this article bears a striking similarity to the content here: hubpages.com/hub/The-Film-about-Facebook-founder-Mark-Zuckerberg although it is unclear to me who copied from who. Apparently, that domain is also on the Wikipedia blacklist, though I'm not sure if that's relevant to the topic of plagiarism or not. Johnny Mnemonic (talk) 15:34, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've noticed a lot of websites that copy Wikipedia's text. I don't know for sure who copied who in this particular instance, but my guess is they copied Wikipedia - and not very well, either (word, syntax, and grammar errors).--Bbb23 (talk) 21:59, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

fiancee?

I'm pretty sure that Zuck and Priscilla are not engaged yet. Any reason not to change "future fiancee" to "girlfriend" or similar? Ccheever (talk) 20:54, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Threeafterthree (talk) 23:14, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Philanthropist

His first sentence has described as a philanthropist. They mentioned two cases where he has donated money, one of them for another social networking setup, and one for Newark area schools. The first cannot be considered philanthropic - it is more of a business venture, and the second case coincides with the release of his movie, a move that has its own criticisms. Should cite either more sources for his philanthropy, or remove it from introduction paragraph - there is not enough to warrant him being called a philanthropist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ssentinull (talk • contribs) 14:35, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1 in 14 people in the World have a Facebook Account is inaccurate

Where it states in the Article that 1 in 14 people in the World have a Facebook Account is inaccurate since that assumes that there are 500 Million unique people on Facebook (since the World's Population is just under 7 Billion currently) when in reality it is 500 Million Accounts and many people have Multiple Accounts also some clubs and organizations have Facebook Accounts (and not just pages) so I recommend it be removed since it is a misleading statistic- in reality I think it is probably around 1 in 25 people.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mark_Zuckerberg&oldid=393831942"