Jump to content

Talk:Peter Thiel

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 208.72.139.94 (talk) at 10:18, 29 May 2014 (→WikiProject class rating: deleted spam). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Peter Thiel headshot

I've gone ahead and changed the photo of Mr. Thiel to a more contemporary, and clearer picture...the old one was out of date and poor in quality, and I don't know what anyone keeps switching it back. The current photo I've uploaded is superior, and fully CC licensed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sandusky sweeper (talk • contribs) 02:43, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 01:58, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

EDGAR reference

Reference #5, which uses the EDGAR service, appears to use an invalid link. Also, the citation is formatted incorrectly. http://edgar.brand.edgar-online.com/EFX_dll/EDGARpro.dll?FetchFilingHtmlSection1?SectionID=1706843-282690-299054 Tweisbach (talk) 06:51, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Peter thiel headshot.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Peter thiel headshot.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status
What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 17:14, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Views

I'm concerned about the "Views" section. It is rarely a good thing to have huge lists of opinions on any topic under the sun, even when the person is very notable this is problematic: the question of what is worth noting or not is extremely vague, and many of the entries tend to be irrelevant to what makes the person notable (in this case, business). All the other expanded sections about what he has actually done are obviously worth mentioning, but I'm going to go ahead and remove the views subsections that are not directly related to business or philanthropy of his. Steven Walling • talk 05:13, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

-- this seems like it still contains all kinds of irrelevant information: who cares about his views on Christianity, or on ? Sorry for the lack of formatting on this post I don't know how to do that. --User:someone else not the guy above 16 July 2012 (EST)

Sometimes Wikipedia articles get too large and begin showing subsidiary information. In such instances, Wikipedia policy suggests to separate some sections into articles of their own (see Wikipedia:Summary style). You may find an article about Peter Thiel's views irrelevant, but Wikipedia has article about all sorts of topics, including article about personal views of specific individuals (e.g., Political positions of Ron Paul). There's nothing holding Wikipedia back from expanding indefinitely. Everything Is Numbers (talk) 09:18, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's not about size, it's about appropriateness. As the author of forked articles like Domestic sheep reproduction I have no problem with forking into obscure/detailed/even weird topics. But the insanely detailed coverage of every opinion one venture capitalist has expressed is just too much. Unlike figures such as politicians or others whose opinions are a matter of public importance reflected in reliable source coverage, this is just an extreme amount of undue weight. Steven Walling • talk 04:39, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Net worth

Thiel 's net worth probably needs to be revised after he just sold the majority of his stake in Facebook.[1] Green Cardamom (talk) 23:24, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

miscellaneous section

I removed this section as trivial and poorly sourced. If any material is readded, can it go in an appropriate section and use high quality RS. --Malerooster (talk) 21:50, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Higher education bubble

Thiel has talked a lot about that and even authored a program where he invested in people 100,000$ each to give up on college and pursue their business ideas instead. Probably should be mentioned in the article. EIN (talk) 13:43, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Beginning should be rewritten

"Peter Andreas Thiel (German: [ˈpeːtɐ̯ anˈdʀeas tiːl]; born October 11, 1967)[1] is a German-born US (wholly internet) entrepreneur, venture capitalist, and hedge fund manager. Thiel cofounded PayPal with Max Levchin, and later, Elon Musk..."

1) What does "US (wholly Internet) entrepreneur" mean? Is it supposed to mean "US, Internet entrepreneur"? Right now it reads as though somehow he is only an American on the Internet.

2) "Thiel cofounded PayPal with Max Levchin, and later, Elon Musk..." How can simeone be a founder if they came later? At the very least this should be clarified. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GeneCallahan (talk • contribs) 13:23, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I removed Musk from this sentence. ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 18:37, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

German-born?

The long-standing version of the article descibed Thiel as a "German-born American". This version was first changed by User:Fat&Happy → [2] - and the editor keeps removing the information, although most contemporary sources describe him as such, e.g. Evgeny Morozov, To Save Everything, Click Here: The Folly of Technological Solutionism, Perseus Books, 2013 [3]. Often, Thiel is even laballed as (e.g. Daily News) "the German businessman, who co-founded PayPal" [4] In my opinion, per WP:OPENPARA → 3.2. the info is "relevant to the subject's notability." - if not relevant, why does the media mention it all the time? → see refs below, for example:

  • Peter Andreas Thiel (/tiːl/; German: [ˈpeːtɐ̯ anˈdʀeas tiːl]; born October 11, 1967) is a German-born[1][2][3][4][5] American entrepreneur, venture capitalist, and hedge fund manager.
  • References
  1. ^ "Early Facebook investor Peter Thiel sells majority of shares". Los Angeles Times. 20 August 2012. Retrieved 21 February 2014.
  2. ^ "Early Facebook backer Peter Thiel offloads shares". The Daily Telegraph. 21 August 2012. Retrieved 21 February 2014.
  3. ^ "Invest like a legend: Peter Thiel". The Globe and Mail. 30 January 2014. Retrieved 21 February 2014.
  4. ^ "Facebook's first investor Peter Thiel makes London friends with $6M TransferWise deal". Business Matters. 14 May 2013. Retrieved 21 February 2014.
  5. ^ "Xero raises another $159m to fuel global growth". BRW. 14 October 2013. Retrieved 21 February 2014.

I would suggest following the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, which means retaining the status before the bold edit was made and reverted until a consensus is reached on the talk page, however User:Fat&Happy prefers to edit war and to remove the content. --IIIraute (talk) 01:49, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

He was born in Germany. The media mentions it. Media frequently mentions things about notable people, especially things that may seem interesting of different; that doesn't make every fact mentioned in the media relevant to their notability and worthy of being placed in the first sentence of the lead. Thiel is notable for being a rich, successful investor and entrepreneur. There is no indication he is particularly noted for his investments in German companies or for his support of particular German politicians or charities. He left Germany as a "toddler", so the culture of the country had little chance to profoundly affect his investment outlook. Would he be less notable if, all other things being equal, he had been born in Mexico, Ghana, Afghanistan, or Antarctica? Exactly how is his birthplace remotely relevant to his notability?
Additionally, IIIraute's version of history seems more than a little disingenuous. The "long-standing version of the article" would actually be the version which described Thiel as "an American businessman" for eight years before IIIraute arbitrarily added "German-born", a version which remained for 20 months before I happened upon it three months ago and reverted it as inappropriate and contrary to the guideline. The more stable version is clearly the version without the late addition. Fat&Happy (talk) 02:57, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, 20 months is a long-standing version - obviously other editors had agreed with my edit that is backed by countless sources. The media, as well as respected authors do not just mention it, but often even dropp the "American" part - calling him "the German-born", "the German businessmann", etc. meaning, that per WP:OPENPARA → 3.2. the info is "relevant to the subject's notability".
Thiel was not just born in Frankfurt - he was born a German citizen - he is of German ethnicity - he was raised by German parents who moved to the US - his first language was German and he did not obtain US citizenship until a much later age. I am sure that had some influence on him. Basically his whole family lives in Germany. In the German-speaking media he usually is described as being "German", i.e. "the German ..." → Süddeutsche Zeitung: "... der Deutsche Peter Thiel ..." [5] --IIIraute (talk) 03:32, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Do you know when he gained US citizenship? Was it before or after he gained his notability? I have removed the "german-born" for now. --Malerooster (talk) 01:19, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:OPENPARAGRAPH "Ethnicity or sexuality should not generally be emphasized in the opening unless it is relevant to the subject's notability. Similarly, previous nationalities or the country of birth should not be mentioned in the opening sentence unless they are relevant to the subject's notability." I have provided lots of sources that show that it is relevant to the subject's notability.

Most contemporary sources describe him as German-born, e.g. Evgeny Morozov, To Save Everything, Click Here: The Folly of Technological Solutionism, Perseus Books, 2013 [6]. Often, Thiel is even laballed as (e.g. Daily News) "the German businessman, who co-founded PayPal" [7] Per WP:OPENPARA → 3.2. the info is "relevant to the subject's notability." - if not relevant, why does the media mention it all the time? → see refs provided in the lead of the article. --IIIraute (talk) 01:34, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have not shown that it is relevant to his notability. --Malerooster (talk) 02:00, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
IIIraute, please gain consensus for the lede before reverting. What do others think? Maybe go to the BLP board? --Malerooster (talk) 02:04, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't that what you should do, before you remove referenced content; i.e. follow the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, which means retaining the status before the bold edit was made and reverted; i.e. "leave the article in the condition it was in, before you did your bold edit and remove content" (often called the status quo ante)? --IIIraute (talk) 02:13, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No, as pointed out above, the article was "stable" for some 8 years? YOU changed the lede per your opinion and bold edit and have been called out on it by more than one editor. Why not have others comment? I will not revert for now. --Malerooster (talk) 02:18, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
23 months is not a stable, long-standing version? My "opinion" is well referenced. --IIIraute (talk) 02:23, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No. Looking at the edit history, and this talk page, shows this. --Malerooster (talk) 02:24, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I posted at the BLP board. Hopefully others will comment.--Malerooster (talk) 02:32, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thanks. --IIIraute (talk) 02:37, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Update: At the BLP board, it doesn't look like there is consensus for using "german-born" in the first sentence. --Malerooster (talk) 23:24, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

...nor for removing it - anyway, I have removed it for now. --IIIraute (talk) 00:46, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I wish more people had commented, either way. Oh well, this can always be revisited and consensus can change. --Malerooster (talk) 01:30, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Peter_Thiel&oldid=610619894"