Musk saying something about Covid that many voices in the media disagree with doesn't mean what he said is wrong. Simply stating that "Musk has spread misinformation about the COVID-19 pandemic and has received criticism from experts for his other views on such matters as artificial intelligence and public transport." is not sufficient. Explain how. And remember that there are experts who disagree with other experts. The term "expert" doesn't mean unerring knowledge. Experts can be wrong. If you're going to slander or accuse, you need to explain how. [[Special:Contributions/2601:147:4102:C340:D87:3858:F582:6684|2601:147:4102:C340:D87:3858:F582:6684]] ([[User talk:2601:147:4102:C340:D87:3858:F582:6684|talk]]) 14:44, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
Musk saying something about Covid that many voices in the media disagree with doesn't mean what he said is wrong. Simply stating that "Musk has spread misinformation about the COVID-19 pandemic and has received criticism from experts for his other views on such matters as artificial intelligence and public transport." is not sufficient. Explain how. And remember that there are experts who disagree with other experts. The term "expert" doesn't mean unerring knowledge. Experts can be wrong. If you're going to slander or accuse, you need to explain how. [[Special:Contributions/2601:147:4102:C340:D87:3858:F582:6684|2601:147:4102:C340:D87:3858:F582:6684]] ([[User talk:2601:147:4102:C340:D87:3858:F582:6684|talk]]) 14:44, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
:We present what sources say. Several sources label Musk's tweets as "misinformation". Furthermore, we say that Musk received criticism, not that he is wrong. [[User:BeŻet|BeŻet]] ([[User talk:BeŻet|talk]]) 14:55, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
:We present what sources say. Several sources label Musk's tweets as "misinformation". Furthermore, we say that Musk received criticism, not that he is wrong. [[User:BeŻet|BeŻet]] ([[User talk:BeŻet|talk]]) 14:55, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
==== Good Article ====
* This is a well structured, well written biographical article. Facts are referenced, quotes are specified, tone is neutral. Worth using as a good example.
Revision as of 17:12, 23 April 2021
Elon Musk is currently an Economics and business good article nominee. Nominated by ~ HAL333 at 21:45, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
An editor has indicated a willingness to review the article in accordance with the good article criteria. Further reviews are welcome from any editor who has not contributed significantly to this article (or nominated it), and can be added to the review page, but the decision whether or not to list the article as a good article should be left to the first reviewer.
Q1: Can I write a message to Elon Musk here? (No.)
A1: No. The "Talk:Elon Musk" page is not for writing messages to Musk. It is only for discussing changes to the Wikipedia article about him. Writing a message to Musk here is pointless and disruptive, and such messages will be removed as an improper use of the page.
Q2: Can you update the article to call Musk a "business magnet"? (No.)
A2: No. Musk once suggested in an interview that his Wikipedia article be changed to describe him as a "business magnet." The tone of that interview was not very serious; he also claimed to be an alien.[1] Wikipedia doesn't have to do what Musk says, and this request has been made and declined dozens of times already. New requests may be removed without a response so that other discussions are not disrupted.
Q3: Should Musk be identified as South African in the opening sentence?
A3: Musk is a US citizen (since 2002) born and raised in South Africa, and also acquired Canadian citizenship via his mother. Including these nationalities in the opening sentence in a balanced way would be complex, and the consensus is that they should instead be explained later in the lead.
Q4: Can you change "Tesla CEO" to "Tesla Technoking"?
A4: No, because he is still CEO according to company records and that is a common corporate title that readers will understand, while "Technoking" is a vanity term. The goal of the article is to inform people, and not to raise a technicality that would confuse them.
Q5: What is the deal with Musk's father supposedly having partly owned an emerald mine?
A5: Both Elon and Errol have said as much in the past but recently changed their stories, leaving the facts murky. In terms of prior confirmation, journalists with access to them have reported it as part of Elon's background. Specifically, a 2014 report originally printed in the San Jose Mercury News (and cited in the article) stated that Errol Musk had "a stake in" a mine. Elon affirmed his father's mine involvement in an interview with Jim Clash, a career interviewer of public figures, that was published by Forbes and withdrawn without explanation a few months later. Elon biographer Ashlee Vance likewise confirmed Errol's mining interest, with Elon's objections but not denials, in a 2020 interview report with Elon.
While today Elon disputes almost everything about the story, Errol has stated that he received hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of emeralds from his dealings.
Q6: Should "Bachelor of Arts in Physics" be "Bachelor of Science" instead?
A6: No. Although it may seem counterintuitive, "Bachelor of Arts in Physics" is the degree that the University of Pennsylvania (among other schools) awards.
Q7: Should the article acknowledge doubts about Musk's academic record?
A7: Wikipedia policy on biographies of living persons requires that negative information about a person must be attributed to reliable published sources, and excludes both self-published sources (e.g. Twitter threads) and court trial records. The article states that sources disagree about when Musk obtained bachelor degrees, and that he did not attend Stanford for any significant amount of time. Any doubts beyond this require appropriate sources.
Q8: Is Musk an engineer?
A8: Musk is chief engineer of SpaceX, a title that applies within the company and that the press regularly mentions. He is not a professional engineer, a distinction within engineering that carries certain legal privileges in the United States, nor has he completed an engineering training program, nor has he ever been hired as an engineer. The article therefore does not include any of these claims. It does note that, from time to time, Musk has made initial product proposals at his companies that his trained engineers then research and develop. He does hold IEEE Honorary Membership.
Q9: Why doesn't the article identify Musk as co-founder of PayPal?
A9: Because that could mislead readers that Musk was involved in the creation of the PayPal service and brand, when he was not. Instead, as the article states, he co-founded a company (X.com Corporation) that acquired the company that had developed PayPal (Confinity Inc.) and then renamed itself as PayPal, Inc.
Q10: Why does this page include criticism of Musk's actions and stances?
A10: Musk is criticized/praised a lot in many reliable sources, and as such we need to talk about these criticisms and praise. To quote from Wikipedia's policy on a neutral point of view, articles must represent "fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic."
Q11: Why is this a "good article" when some people consider Musk a bad person?
A11: "Good article" on Wikipedia refers to the way the article is written, not what kind of person Musk is. Good articles have been found to satisfy Wikipedia editorial standards for accuracy, verifiability and balanced presentation.
Q12: Why doesn't this page call Musk African American?
A12:African Americans are an ethnic group of Americans with total or partial ancestry from any of the Black racial groups of Africa. Musk does not have ancestry from the Black racial groups of Africa; his ancestry is European.
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Automobiles, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of automobiles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AutomobilesWikipedia:WikiProject AutomobilesTemplate:WikiProject AutomobilesAutomobile articles
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Finance & Investment, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Finance and Investment on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Finance & InvestmentWikipedia:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentTemplate:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentFinance & Investment articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spaceflight, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of spaceflight on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpaceflightWikipedia:WikiProject SpaceflightTemplate:WikiProject Spaceflightspaceflight articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject South Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of South Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.South AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject South AfricaTemplate:WikiProject South AfricaSouth Africa articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of Pennsylvania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of University of Pennsylvania on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.University of PennsylvaniaWikipedia:WikiProject University of PennsylvaniaTemplate:WikiProject University of PennsylvaniaUniversity of Pennsylvania articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology articles
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, which has been designated as a contentious topic.
@JShark: could you please explain your removal of content, and what edit war and complaint are you referring to? BeŻet (talk) 20:55, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Even his authorized biography touches on his alleged treatment of employees. When I have the time/energy, I'll pull out some material. ~ HAL333 21:50, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I just want serious sources and not speculation. You should also accept that there are many people who dream of working in companies like SpaceX. That fact indicates that working in these companies is not bad as their critics say. If he was such a bad boss, I bet thousands of people wouldn't show up to work at companies like SpaceX. In every company there are people who do not adapt to the way of working and that does not mean that the boss is very bad. Musk says he wants innovation in his companies and that if employees don't try to innovate, they are probably not fit to work at companies like SpaceX. Personally, I prefer demanding bosses like Musk, who create an environment conducive to innovation. --JShark (talk) 03:55, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Are you saying WIRED, Business Insider and The Wall Street Journal are not "serious" sources? Also, you're talking about SpaceX, not Tesla. Finally, your speculation is of no importance. BeŻet (talk) 11:03, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nobody cares. Stop being so emotionally involved: we're writing an encyclopedia article not a slobbering Instagram fanpage. ~ HAL333 04:02, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@HAL333: Learn to speak respectfully. Just because you don't care doesn't mean the world's billions of people think like you. --JShark (talk) 04:27, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Learn how to use a talkpage instead of just pasting massive walls of text. ~ HAL333 04:31, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@HAL333: I posted important information from an interview about Elon Musk's treatment of his employees. There is nothing wrong with that. You get irritated by everything and you should learn to calm down or drink something for your nerves. --JShark (talk) 04:37, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
An interview with Elon Musk is probably the most terrible source I can think of to talk about his treatment of his employees. BeŻet (talk) 11:03, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You don't make convincing arguments about it. Interviews allow you to know people's thoughts and give a voice to the accused of being an awful boss. --JShark (talk) 12:48, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Stop pinging me or I'll copy and paste War and Peace. Fight that. ~ HAL333 04:39, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Leo Tolstoy has very good books. It is good to read a lot. You have more books to recommend me and I will gladly read them. And let's stop fighting like little children because love is better than war. --JShark (talk) 04:56, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have no personal beef with you, JShark. It's just that I think sometimes you're too partial. An editor must be capable of writing critically of subjects they admire and objectively of those they despise. ~ HAL333 17:25, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
17:45 The workforce is a key component in radical innovation. What do you do to motivate a workforce to help them become more radically innovative?
The most important thing to do is to make sure that you have an incentive structure where innovation is rewarded and lack of innovation is punished. Carrot and stick. People that are innovating should be promoted sooner, and if someone’s in a role where innovation should be happening and it’s not, then they should not be promoted or exited. "Then let me tell you, you’ll get innovation real fast. How much do you want?"
19:40 Wouldn’t that make people too risk averse?
You have to have some acceptance of failure – failure has to be an option. If you don’t allow trying and failing you might get something worse than lack of innovation – things may go backwards. "You want reward and punishment to be proportionate to the actions you seek." Reward for trying and succeeding, minor consequences for trying and failing, and major negative consequences for not trying. "With that incentive structure you’ll get innovation like you won’t believe."
44:00 Intellectual property – how do you protect it in a world where information is constantly under attack?
The real way you achieve protection is by innovating fast enough. If innovation is high, you won’t need to worry about intellectual property because competitors will be copying something you did years ago. Innovation per unit of time is what matters. What is your rate of innovation, and is that accelerating or decelerating? Big Business tends to get less innovative per employee and also sometimes in absolute terms, and it’s likely because of incentives. Incentives must be aligned with innovation.
50:40 How do you create a culture of enthusiasm at Tesla and SpaceX?
There is a pretty big selection effect, because especially in important engineering roles, they look for people that have demonstrated innovation. As mentioned earlier, the incentives in the company help – they reward innovation and punish lack of innovation. --JShark (talk) 04:17, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Your original research is of no value here. If you have no solid argument against including well sourced information, the subsection will be returned to the article. BeŻet (talk) 11:03, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Clearly your supposed unbiased information is not. You can accuse a person of many things but there is no conviction that says that Musk treats all his employees badly. Most of his employees continue to work for him. I don't see Elon Musk in jail for mistreating his employees. --JShark (talk) 11:27, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The presumption of innocence is a legal principle that every person accused of any crime is considered innocent until proven guilty. Under the presumption of innocence, the legal burden of proof is thus on the prosecution, which must present compelling evidence to the trier of fact (a judge or a jury). If the prosecution does not prove the charges true, then the person is acquitted of the charges. The prosecution must in most cases prove that the accused is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. If reasonable doubt remains, the accused must be acquitted. --JShark (talk) 11:34, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, but this is absurd. We are reporting what sources are saying. Do you have a source which disputes what is stated in the original sources? Arguing that people still work for him so it's all good is pretty wild. If this is the extent of your argument, I will return the subsection. BeŻet (talk) 11:37, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Every media has a political line. There are journalists who only speak ill of Elon Musk. An encyclopedia should not put speculative information but truthful and real information. You should place sources of jury verdicts otherwise Musk could sue you for defamation. Defamation (also known as calumny, vilification, libel, slander or traducement) is the oral or written communication of a false statement about another that unjustly harms their reputation and usually constitutes a tort or crime. --JShark (talk) 11:48, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Please stick to real Wikipedia guidelines and not made-up ones. BeŻet (talk) 11:55, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You probably don't have verdicts that Musk treats all of his employees badly. That is why you are afraid to place those sources and prefer only to add speculative information. In law, a verdict is the formal finding of fact made by a jury on matters or questions submitted to the jury by a judge. --JShark (talk) 12:00, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Stop copying and pasting nonsense. We are literally stating what sources are saying, and clearly attributing that to said sources, which is perfectly legal and permitted on Wikipedia. Being an awful boss isn't a crime, so I have no idea why do you bring up courts and verdicts. BeŻet (talk) 12:10, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You are not impartial. Musk is not regarded by everyone and all of his employees as an awful boss. You're making a generalization by saying that everyone thinks Musk is an awful boss. If he was such an awful boss then no one would work for him. --JShark (talk) 12:19, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Stop removing content that you simply don't like. You have not presented a single argument backed up by Wikipedia policy. BeŻet (talk) 13:16, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The content that was added and then removed seems to be properly cited and relevant, and therefore should be reincluded. Does anyone besides JShark have some legitimate reason for this content to not be added? QRep2020 (talk) 16:08, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Although neutrally written, properly cited description of criticism can be perfectly valid under WP:NPOV policy, including it in the main article is giving it WP:UNDUE weight. The content has its place on the Criticism of Tesla, Inc. page – though that page needs a serious overhaul before it could be considered as neutrally written. Rosbif73 (talk) 16:55, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Feel free to make recommendations. QRep2020 (talk) 16:20, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There is a huge number of sources reporting on his managerial style and treatment of employees. I think it's easily DUE. BeŻet (talk) 18:00, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
RfC about Musk's treatment of employees
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 it appropriate to add this information and references to the article about Elon Musk? JShark (talk) 03:46, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
What information and what references? Am I missing something? PraiseVivec (talk) 11:39, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I assume this RfC is talking about the information that was involved in an edit war recently, ending with a series of four edits summarised by the following diff [1] and discussed above. @JShark: could you please confirm that this is indeed the intended subject of your RfC, before we actually start discussing this? Rosbif73 (talk) 11:56, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
My suspicion is that this RfC is follow-up to the #Musk's treatment of employees section above, and as such I feel that this RfC should really be a subsection of that section. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:17, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It's about that information above. And it would be good if people not involved in the dispute participate since some of those involved in the dispute such as users called BeŻet or QRep2020 are supporting inclusion. It would also be good if users who have never edited this article participate to have an impartial perspective.--JShark (talk) 05:07, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not suggesting that uninvolved people shouldn't participate; nor am I suggesting that anybody should be debarred. I'm merely saying that if this RfC is follow-up to the Musk's treatment of employees section, it should be altered from level 2 to level 3, to make the connection clear. This will answer the questions put by PraiseVivec and Rosbif73. The {{rfc}} tag may be retained. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 11:14, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for clarifying, I've been active on this site for years, but I still get confused by how talk pages work sometimes. PraiseVivec (talk) 13:30, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support: His infamous managerial style and treatment of his employees has been reported quite widely in several sources, including WIRED and The Wall Street Journal amongst others. I think it's WP:DUE and should be included, provided we attribute the claims to sources. BeŻet (talk) 14:44, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Noteworthy and well-documented in reliable sources. Stonkaments (talk) 18:26, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support: DUE and verified by multiple sources. QRep2020 (talk) 20:43, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I have no idea why it was removed to begin with; it is WP:DUE. Wretchskull (talk) 20:52, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support - The removed content is well-sourced and highly relevant to the article. The reasons given for its removal in the above discussion are comically biased and unencyclopedic. PraiseVivec (talk) 13:38, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support There are wide range of verifiable sources that reported it.Sea Ane (talk) 16:35, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per above and my reasoning expressed in previous discussions. This looks like a WP:SNOWCLOSE to me. ~ HAL333 18:14, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Conditional support dependent on improved sourcing. WSJ works great but not too hot on Electrek or Yahoo... ~ HAL333 13:39, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Exclude - I differ - I think it not a major part of his life or coverage, and contrary to WP policy and good style. Suggest restraint here, read WP:BLP and the essay WP:CRIT. That diff content seems *not* a match for the meaning of “management style” and not what predominates in a Google search for his management style, e.g. said “transformational”. This seems just an WP:OR lead-in over a collection of a few criticisms of no particular note. Not a specific event that shows wide coverage and some significance. Not a biographically important significant life event or choice here. Should not be included much less get a whole ‘criticism’ section. There may be a line or two for these two topics suitable for his BLP, but this isn’t it. Cheers Markbassett (talk) 03:48, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
oppose (conditional) - I suggest to omit the following excerpt and/or move it into a relevant Tesla's company article (assuming the RfC's disputed revision is Revision as of 14:39, April 10, 2021). This doesn't belong to Musk's one:
Additionally, people working at Tesla's factories expressed concerns about working conditions and called them "a modern day sweatshop".[1][2]
Oppose -- doesn't reflect a major part of the guy's life, and would be undue to magnify a few voices in contrast to the many who news accounts would seem to show quite the opposite. Agree with the rationale of Markbassett. If this is strongly enough sourced, it might fit into an article on Tesla... but I'm guessing that even there an opinion of a few that something is a sweatshop doesn't get the only coverage where the balance would be to show others, and the US employment rules enforcement agencies, that reflect OT is being paid where it is required by law etc. N2e (talk) 01:47, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@N2e: Could you share the news articles or reports that show the opposite? BeŻet (talk) 11:17, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
To address conditional support, we should remove the part talking about the conditions at the factories, and focus on Musk and his behaviour. This resolves both conditionals above. BeŻet (talk) 16:11, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
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.
A week has passed and it seems the consensus is to include the information in general, but to exclude information about work conditions at the factories, which should be in a separate article. Closing and adding content. BeŻet (talk) 11:13, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Elon's student debt
@JShark: - could you explain why is it relevant to include Musk's student debt in the section regarding his wealth? BeŻet (talk) 21:00, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I would support removal as well. The claim is directly from Musk (making it a primary source), is not accompanied by any actual evidence, and can be found in no other source, even his authorized biography. ~ HAL333 21:48, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Musk's net worth changes every day with the stock price. The Infobox person template example doesn't show an arrow. If an arrow is included, and be meaningful to readers, it should probably show a trend, maybe of the last year, not each day's change due to daily stock prices changes. Thoughts? Pmsyyz (talk) 03:05, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The daily increase or decrease arrow in the IB is helpful imo. But, I agree with the need for a trend graph - it would be really helpful if someone made and uploaded it to Commons for use in the "net worth" section in the body. (If someone needs inspiration, the article for Jeff Bezos already has one.). ~ HAL333 03:31, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That looks great. Much appreciated. ~ HAL333 04:36, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nice looking graphic, makes the information readily available. Good job! PraiseVivec (talk) 11:16, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 12 April 2021
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Please change the wording from Business magnate to Business magnet. 141.117.116.182 (talk) 20:08, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The FAQ at the top of this page states why it shouldn't be changed. Wretchskull (talk) 20:19, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 April 2021
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Musk saying something about Covid that many voices in the media disagree with doesn't mean what he said is wrong. Simply stating that "Musk has spread misinformation about the COVID-19 pandemic and has received criticism from experts for his other views on such matters as artificial intelligence and public transport." is not sufficient. Explain how. And remember that there are experts who disagree with other experts. The term "expert" doesn't mean unerring knowledge. Experts can be wrong. If you're going to slander or accuse, you need to explain how. 2601:147:4102:C340:D87:3858:F582:6684 (talk) 14:44, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
We present what sources say. Several sources label Musk's tweets as "misinformation". Furthermore, we say that Musk received criticism, not that he is wrong. BeŻet (talk) 14:55, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Good Article
This is a well structured, well written biographical article. Facts are referenced, quotes are specified, tone is neutral. Worth using as a good example.
.svg){kind=small}
