Jump to content

Talk:Yank Barry

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 104.244.69.106 (talk) at 19:17, 20 July 2015 (→When do you unleash the hounds on this). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

990

I glanced at the 990 from for the GCVF. Three items caught my attention:

  1. The expenditure on food (food and medical(?) supplies) appears to be some $194k, spent with Ailments ED Foods. If we take the number of meals provided at 900m, this is about 4,600 meals per $1 - before allowing for medical supplies, which I don't see in Ailments ED Foods portfolio.
  2. Schedule L Page 2 has a payment of $35k to a Director for (Relief Goods) (actually the payment appears to be both from and to the GCVF, but this is presumably an error.)
  3. The late filing request at the end (2 pages, Form 8868) is incorrectly filled, only one of Section I or Section II should be filled in. The application is also retrospective.

All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 22:01, 22 June 2014 (UTC).

Citation needed in Global Village section

Article text: "The foundation, which is funded by the profits from his VitaPro food business,[citation needed] is said to have spent more than US$1 million feeding and housing Syrian refugees in Bulgaria since 2012." Has anyone come across information to verify that claim? All I can find close to it is the fact that the free meals they have given to people around the world come from Vitapro.[1].Just as an example of the information I am finding. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editingisthegame (talk • contribs) 01:26, 20 July 2014‎ (UTC) [reply]

Barry vs Holyfield lawsuit

Press reports of a lawsuit over a $600K loan by Barry to Evander Holyfield, reported as not fully repaid and now in litigation.[2] See mention of Holyfield in the article. John Nagle (talk) 20:22, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

TMZ seems to get a mixed response on the Reliable Sources Noticeboard (and last I checked, the other sources I was finding were citing TMZ.) --Nat Gertler (talk) 20:53, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The TMZ article just seems too skimpy. I'd like to at least know where the suit was filed, for instance. Could be hearsay. - Richfife (talk) 03:21, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It's in Justia as "Yank Barry v. Evander Holyfield et al", California Central District Court.[3] Probably not worth including in the article yet. I agree that TMZ is a marginal source, and it's just a filed case, not a decision. John Nagle (talk) 06:27, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Article on heise.de

http://www.heise.de/tp/artikel/45/45193/1.html

It doesn't auto-translate well, but I don't get the impression there's much there. It seems to me like the takeaway is "I tried to dig into the story, but I quickly hit a wall". Someone with better German than I may have a different opinion. - Richfife (talk) 14:50, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

From the article (Google auto-translation): "Comparing the illustration on the VITAPRO site alleged VITAPRO-building with the production facility of producing for VITAPRO food manufacturer Aliments Ed Foods in Montreal, Canada, one realizes that it is one and the same building." The photos mentioned appear to be the building photo on VitaPro page [4] and on the Ailments ED page [5]. There is a connection between the two; in the IRS Form 990 for Global Village Champions Foundation, page 8, GVCF spent $194,186 with Ailments ED. [6] Ailments ED sells bulk sauces, soups, and flavorings to food manufacturers. The building, a warehouse/factory with an office section, can be seen in Google Street View.[7][8]. It bears an Ailments ED sign, not a VitaPro sign.
Also: ""What about the lawsuit against the Wikipedia authors?" I ask Glenn Selig during our Skype conference end of January 2015. He wants to give me no explanation as to why it was not, as previously announced, raised again. Instead, he told me, "We are suing the National Post ". The Canadian newspaper had problematized in April 2012 in an article including the seriousness of Yank Barry's first nomination for the Nobel Peace Prize in the same year, had this been yet filed just from the Bulgarian lawyer Kiril Gorianov in Oslo, the Sofia representatives of VITAPRO and "Global Village Champions Foundation". "Hold me up to date on the 'National Post' procedure ', I ask Glenn Selig, after all, I work now and then to media issues." That refers to the lawsuit over this article; [9] which we already cite.
There's not much here that we didn't know before, but some of it now has a reliable source behind it. John Nagle (talk) 19:10, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Add a sentence about the National Post lawsuit with this as a reference? I don't see any of the other stuff going in without getting into WP:SYNTH territory. - Richfife (talk) 01:23, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Agree about WP:SYNTH re apparently bogus building picture. The National Post lawsuit has come up before. The case is BARRY, Yank v O'CONNOR, Joe, in Supreme Civil (General) Vancouver Law Courts, British Columbia, case #135015. If you plug "Barry, Yank" into the Vancouver courts search page[10] some case information appears. Filed in 2013, still pending, last update June 2015. Barry's press agent has mentioned the case in press releases. Probably not worth putting in the article until the case is decided. John Nagle (talk) 07:13, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Works for me. - Richfife (talk) 19:16, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

When do you unleash the hounds on this

Do the research: toasting comes in degrees. And the way I see it one's burned to a crisp. (On to boil the next frog...) https://books.google.ca/books?id=9oMeCgAAQBAJ&pg=PP53&dq=yank+barry&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CDkQ6AEwBWoVChMIwZHn8_LkxgIVAX6SCh0hBgCe#v=onepage&q=yank%20barry&f=false — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.244.69.106 (talk) 14:41, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That is a self-published source and thus not adequate to use as a reference for the biography of someone still alive, per our WP:BLP policy-Nat Gertler (talk) 15:34, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
When you scroll through to its end, you'll find two Montreal Gazette articles that go into a bit of Yank Barry's business dealings: both were on the front page of the Montreal Gazette of the 90's. Can someone otherwise refer to those published dealings on the net since they're not available anywhere? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.244.69.106 (talk • contribs)
That's a strange self-published document, and worthless as a source. (Very strange. It contains some content by the author, and a huge amount of filler, including what seems to be the entire Ontario Criminal Code.) However, it contains images of an article in the Montreal Gazette for Saturday, February 27, 1999, "Loan Money Goes Astray", by Campbell Clark, which mentions Yank Barry and contains a picture of him. We already had a cite to a Montreal Gazette article from 1998, but this seems to be new. Barry seems to have been peripheral to a small business loan scam; he introduced some of the parties to each other, and admitted that to the press, but wasn't charged. There doesn't seem to be anything useful for the article here. John Nagle (talk) 21:13, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I have that article if someone wants to see the whole text. The upshot is "this insane money shell game of some sort took place. Yank Barry was a player at some level. I (the reporter) can't figure it the big picture, but here's a bunch of small facts". I don't see it as something that needs to go in, but someone else may disagree. - Richfife (talk) 22:22, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
These two articles have NEVER been accessible on the web, even though they were independently researched and given importance in Barry's hometown of the time. Yank Barry wasn't "peripheral to a small business loan scam", he was the center of it and that's how he came into existence, per his own accountant (unless Yank Barry's own accountant has nothing to confirm publicly), the first informant who spoke with law enforcement about his dealings (both SBLA and Texas) and the author of the carrying tome on the Candian Criminal Code. Given that Mister Barry's World Stock Exchange foray and other issues can be portrayed, that too did not lead to being criminally charged, is there a reason why being more directly involved with considerable SBLA fraud, as investigated by the Montreal Gazette, cannot? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.244.69.106 (talk) 22:06, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"Lyndon Maither" has six of those strange books, each with huge amounts of text from public domain legislation plus a Yank Barry related rant.[11] One of those books is referenced in Wikipedia in Debtor-in-possession financing, but that appears to be an innocent error by an editor looking for bankruptcy codes on line. See [12]. I'm not sure what's going on here, but this is getting weird. Anyway, per WP:BLPCRIME, this probably shouldn't go in the article. John Nagle (talk) 06:36, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Agree, except I would say "definitely" rather than "probably." VQuakr (talk) 07:34, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"According to an investigative report by the Montreal Gazette from October 1998, Global Village Market (GVM) was a venture owned by Barry through which he sold VitaPro.[5] The company's motto was "doing well by doing good".[5] According to a report by UPI, GVM’s shares were listed on the World Investors' Stock Exchange, which was part of an investment fraud carried out by the Caribbean-based First International Bank of Grenada.[13]" The Montreal Gazette articles that were generated around Yank Barry in the late 90's also never accused him of a crime (it was his own accountant who did that) and went on produce a national award for journalism for the journalist (Campbell Clark), and so is there a double standard in wiki-disclosure of "investigative reports" by the Montreal Gazette, since, again, this news piece has never come to light on his wiki-page? Is its contents, in fact, more directly relevant to Yank Barry's public persona: like the others? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.244.69.106 (talk) 15:51, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Again, having tried to post the below to the internet's public persona of Yank Barry, which is open to all to comment on 'San Francisco', is there a double standard in what is publicly documented on about Yank Barry(: now you know why I put it in my own compilations and indepth tax law 'strange books' asked for by national law firms)?

"According to an investigative report by the Montreal Gazette of February 27th, 1999, titled “Loan Money Goes Astray” Yank Barry was directly referenced as the loan broker who sourced many Cdn. Federally guaranteed loans for his clients, through 1993 to 1995, around Montreal through two employees of the National Bank of Canada. Included in those revealed clients was, Sidney Lallouz, actioned against for a $1.1 M very delinquent, evaded, tax debt by CRA in 1995 (detailed in a Montreal Gazette piece “Taxman Grabs Drug-Bought Mall” – June 7th, 1995) and another client of Yank Barry’s was Claude Di Fazio, presently charged with narcotics trafficking in New Brunswick. In that newspaper expose, Yank Barry stated that he met Sidney Lallouz while incarcerated, while subsequent to that, Sidney Lallouz was convicted for importing 22.5 tonnes of hashish into Canada. With respect to Yank Barry’s companies the Montreal Gazette also found questionable transactions involving the federal loan guarantee program."

104.244.69.106 (talk) 19:16, 20 July 2015 (UTC)Lyndon Maither[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Yank_Barry&oldid=672314187"