Jump to content

Talk:Michael Pocalyko

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

Proposed merge with The Navigator (Pocalyko novel)

[edit]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of this discussion was no consensus - do not merge Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:58, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fairly successful businessman with one modestly successful book -- a single article will be stronger. DGG ( talk ) 02:30, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. The novel is notable enough by itself, as is the businessman. -- Mikeblas (talk) 14:42, 2 May 2014 (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.
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Michael Pocalyko. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:03, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Michael Pocalyko. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:29, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Suicide of Eden and connection to SI/Pocalyko

[edit]

An edit war has been occurring here regarding the allegations made by (now most likely deceased) trans woman Eden, claiming that Pocalyko, along with 2 others as members of Pocalyko's firm SI, arranged for her deportation to Saudi Arabia, knowing that her parents that were there were conservatives who would later forcibly detransition her, this leading to her suicide.

Such claims are obviously of a high degree, Emotions are running high considering the recency of all this, and I am of bias myself since I am a trans man, but even if such allegations are untrue, they should be written here because of their severity and importance, especially on the chance such allegations are true. Littlepagers (talk) 19:55, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Such claims cannot be supported by cites to social media posts. WP:BLP is a very important policy. 97.113.161.27 (talk) 20:07, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I understand so, especially considering the source on here is primary which to my understanding isn't exactly the highest quality, there is the off chance Eden might have lied, even if very rare, but such allegations are getting popular attention, and in my honest opinion the article should be edited to reflect such.
We'll see and know soon if She really was right, but for now it's most important to let people know what's going on Littlepagers (talk) 20:09, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's a self-published source (WP:SPS), not reliable for content in a WP:BLP (except about self, and only then from verified accounts). @Littlepagers, please familiarize yourself with the WP:BLP policy. Schazjmd (talk) 20:12, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, to be fair, if you exhort to new users that that page is important, you should also be aware that it contains at least one lie: "Wikipedia must get the article right". Wikipedia does not care about correctness or accurate representation of facts of reality. Wikipedia only cares about its content being attributable to a source *considered* reputable enough (regardless of whether it is). Xenofur (talk) 01:58, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That is because we are an encyclopaedia by design, which limits us to whatever those sources say. Otherwise we'd just be another vapid social media website that takes a "Fuck the facts, I'm doing what will get me attention!" approach. —Jéské Couriano (No further replies will be forthcoming.) 02:57, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's not particularly insightful to receive a reply to "you are communicating to a newbie, which is bound to be hard if your communication is not honest about <meta thing>" with defense of why you're doing <meta thing>, while missing the problem is with the lack of honesty. Also, you amusingly make a related mistake: You complain about "fuck the facts", when wikipedia literally, by design, as i pointed out above and which you yourself agreed to, runs by the credo: "fuck the facts." To spell it out slightly more directly to you: The problem isn't that WP does this. It should. The problem is that WP pretends it doesn't, which confuses newbies. Xenofur (talk) 15:46, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There have been instances where social media was used as a source. Especially when the primary source is social media. 88.212.43.125 (talk) 20:10, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I understand, but we are talking about a living person here, so unless some website or independent/impartial person verifies this, or even (i see this happen) Pocalyko admits it on the off chance that happens, then we need to be extra careful about what we say.
People like to lie, I've seen people lie about the worst things ever, and if it indeed was a lie, not only would Eden have straight up made things up to defame a person, but Wikipedia would have a libel suit on its hands, We're talking about a government contractor here.
I'm not saying Eden lied, She most likely hasn't, and her target if she was lying was odd (why some random government contractor?), but if she did lie, it wouldn't make the top 5 of the most outrageous things that people lied about that I saw.
We will probably know by tomorrow or even in a few hours. Littlepagers (talk) 20:16, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There is no “true media” coverage so didn’t happened? nice
It happened, she wrote that message. We really need newspaper with headline “yep, we think she wrote that on her page” to “verify” it?
Or we need mike to say publicly “yes, I participated in murder”?
Or maybe her family?
There is very high chance that this case will never be investigated or even covered in media. 77.222.27.86 (talk) 11:06, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The reasoning that just because someone made an accusation on social media, it should be discussed in an encyclopedia article is flawed. Seriously, think that through. Schazjmd (talk) 14:52, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia editors and admins are supporters of transgender genocide. Those allegations will never be mentioned even if they’d be confirmed to be true. 88.212.43.125 (talk) 20:07, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note that our BLP policy also applies to talk pages. 97.113.161.27 (talk) 20:08, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If they're confirmed to be true, then we can add them. Otherwise, it's a libel suit waiting to happen, and everyone who added it intentionally has a crosshair on them. Our biographical policies exist for a reason, and that reason is to avoid another Seigenthaler incident. —Jéské Couriano (No further replies will be forthcoming.) 20:11, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That's not going to convince anyone, sorry. IP's who deeply and rightfully care about Eden won't be persuaded by Wikipedia getting sued. 🍁🏳️‍🌈 DinoSoupCanada 🏳️‍🌈 🍁 (talk) 21:26, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I invite you to reread my responce; you missed a crucial word between "and" and "who". —Jéské Couriano (No further replies will be forthcoming.) 21:29, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Making threats like this is churlish and in any case innacurate. Not all Wikipedia editors are within the jurisdiction of the USA and subject to its libel laws. 62.240.134.180 (talk) 23:45, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not making a threat; I'm reiterating why BLP exists. —Jéské Couriano (No further replies will be forthcoming.) 03:08, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
We and other editors are not getting sued because someone vandalized wikipedia for 5 seconds before it was reverted. 🍁🏳️‍🌈 DinoSoupCanada 🏳️‍🌈 🍁 (talk) 23:54, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Are you sure about that? Canadian Owl (talk) 19:56, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If it matters to anyone, Knight’s roommate has been interviewed and confirmed Pocalyko and Cole were involved in Knight’s trafficking. https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2023/03/family-forced-saudi-trans-woman-eden-knight-forced-to-detransition-now-shes-dead/ Mark 2000 (talk) 17:46, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Mark 2000 yep, reported in LGBTQ Nation and in Vice as of this morning -- both sources are currently used in this article. RexSueciae (talk) 18:15, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Correct. Here is the Vice link that names Pocalyko. If Vice can name him, Wikipedia has to as well.
https://www.vice.com/en/article/jg5ey4/eden-knight-believed-dead-after-forced-detransition-saudi-arabia Mark 2000 (talk) 20:01, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Our WP:BLP policies exist to protect the people we write about, whomever they are, and it's one of our most important policies. Until reliable sources start reporting on this (which might not even happen), we won't be adding this to the article, so I recommend dropping this conversation for now. Isabelle Belato 🏳‍🌈 03:30, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Should the page be protected or semi-protected in the meantime? 2600:1003:B11D:947F:58E4:7664:2138:8C9A (talk) 11:18, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Also, should all the blp violations be scrubbed from the revision history of the page on a book he wrote? 2600:1003:B11D:947F:58E4:7664:2138:8C9A (talk) 11:30, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
(Back on my normal IP today, I was 97.113.161.27 during this mess) - this article and a few related ones have been protected. The content has been pretty well scrubbed from the history here, but if it lingers in the history of related articles, please do request revision deletion (preferably in private, with links to the specific offending revisions). 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:07, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please consider that both lgbtq nation and Vice have named Pocalyko. These are major publications. You can find the links up thread. This should be part of the page now. It’s verified and easily referenced. Mark 2000 (talk) 22:54, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Mark 2000 those publications named Pocalyko now, as of this morning -- that thread of conversation was from three days ago, before the earliest journalists had finished writing! RexSueciae (talk) 23:52, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

PSA

[edit]

Hi. I know it's tough.

As someone in the trans community, I know the urge to want to edit someone's page like this.

But wouldn't it be better to wait until the mainstream covers this? The one word added in isn't going to do much. They'll revert it anyway.

I know it's tough, but this isn't the place. Editing the page like that isn't going to do anything. 🍁🏳️‍🌈 DinoSoupCanada 🏳️‍🌈 🍁 (talk) 21:22, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's better you hear it from me than someone who strictly cares about order, instead of humanity. 🍁🏳️‍🌈 DinoSoupCanada 🏳️‍🌈 🍁 (talk) 21:23, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It wasn't always just one word. Quite a few of the edits added in an entire section about it, sourced to social media. —Jéské Couriano (No further replies will be forthcoming.) 21:25, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
not sure why my comment keeps being taken down when i’m simply pointing out that the “mainstream” is not known for covering trans issues favorably… 146.113.104.37 (talk) 16:40, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
To answer the question, I would expect far stronger sourcing than a social media post that hasn't gone through a professional editor (these exist even in LGBTQ+-focussed news media) and thus have not been fact-checked for accuracy so as to avoid causing a trial by social media. I have damn good reason to worry that this will end up devolving into that even after acceptable sources are found because emotions are running high and people are looking for retribution rather than justice. —Jéské Couriano (No further replies will be forthcoming.) 17:26, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why in the world is Wikipedia doing keeping even the *edits* in *history* hidden? how much of a donation did the guy make? 2605:A601:AF20:7500:45D9:424D:F967:BC9A (talk) 04:15, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Until any of this can be verified, the edits are egregious violations of the the policy we have on biographies of living people, and so need to be hidden. Galobtter (pingó mió) 04:19, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It is standard operating procedure to revision-delete and/or suppress egregious biographical violations - which accusing someone of accessory-to-suicide and/or murder without ironclad third-party sourcing is. —Jéské Couriano (No further replies will be forthcoming.) 05:00, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
How much money has he been paying you all? I didn't accuse him. I said that Eden accused him. An accusation with 3 sources to back it up is worth keeping on. 🏳️‍⚧️DinoSoupCanada🏳️‍⚧️ (talk) 20:40, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Three sources that are no good. Just the names of these sources scream "unedited spam". ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 20:43, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The sources you gave weren't reliable enough for such heavy accusations. It's not a matter of getting paid. LilianaUwU (talk / contributions) 20:51, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Little Miss Desu: per WP:BLP you must not restore contested negative material about a living person without achieving consensus here first. ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 21:02, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've put in a request at Arb Enforcement to have the XCP extended here and expanded to The Navigator (Pocalyko novel) (CT regimes: GS, BLP). I'm getting a really bad case of deja vu here, as I hinted above, and want to forestall any headaches. —Jéské Couriano (No further replies will be forthcoming.) 21:22, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Henry Giardina the writer of the source which was just removed is a reputable journalist who has worked in various different publications. In my view this counts as a reputable source for this information. Many thanks. Des Vallee (talk) 01:00, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is now reliable sourcing talking about Pocalyko's role in this, so I think we can add it to the page at this point. -Sailor Ceres (talk) 01:06, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. I'll keep the AE request up as a precaution; I don't foresee the anger dissipating with this. If anything, there's a chance it might intensify. —Jéské Couriano (No further replies will be forthcoming.) 01:19, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Is INTO a RS? If anything, it's better than nothing. I would still wait to see if websites like PinkNews cover it, though. LilianaUwU (talk / contributions) 01:21, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think they qualify. They're owned by Q Digital, who also run Queerty and LGBTQ Nation. -Sailor Ceres (talk) 01:37, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I hate to be "that editor", but is Into/IntoMore a reliable source? I've checked the RSN archives and they've only been mentioned once in a discussion unrelated to them. And I'm not sure I've seen them cited by other RS. Sideswipe9th (talk) 01:23, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Given that we consider its sister sites Queerty and LGBTQ Nation to be reliable sources, I don't see a reason why we wouldn't treat INTO the same as them. Sailor Ceres (talk) 01:39, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say that IntoMore does not look like a reliable source, any more so than any other online churnalism-type outlet. Their "About Us" page is opaque on how exactly their editorial oversight works (nor do they list editors / staff -- which, to be fair, is not surprising, might possibly be for safety reasons), their "Contact Us" is an email address, and I'm pretty sure it's a relatively new enterprise, so there's no looking to its reputation (also why it lacks a wiki page while its sister sites have them). And if it is reliable, it's borderline. The author seems to be a reputable author, but given that we are looking to back an extremely controversial claim, my suggestion is to wait for a better source. RexSueciae (talk) 01:41, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note that Dazed magazine has picked up the story (although they do not refer to Pocalyko by name, it is clear they are talking about the same news event / allegations). Reminder that this is a highly charged event and it may be some time before we see significant reliable source coverage (and even then we'd need to remember WP:DUE). Until then, keep an eye out, I guess. RexSueciae (talk) 16:20, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The Independent has published a story about Eden Knight. Vacant0 (talk) 20:14, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't mention Pocalyko though :/ ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 20:17, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If reliable sources refer to "american fixers" and also quote literal phrases from her suicide note, and we have access to the contents of her suicide note and see that she mentions Michael Pocalyko and Ellen Colen as "american fixers", I find it very shocking that some editors are trying to block such clearly well-substantiated edits in this article. KajenCAT (talk) 14:41, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, as that would go against WP:SYNTH and WP:BLPSPS. If a reliable secondary source does not say it, we don't, either. ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 14:56, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This is synthesis, and we cannot engage in that. We are limited to what reliable third-party sources explicitly say. We are an encyclopaedia, not a research work. —Jéské Couriano (No further replies will be forthcoming.) 16:21, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Vice News has reported on the allegations. I think at this point we have crossed the threshold of reliable sourcing needed to make a small note in the Wikipedia article (weighing the qualities of due/undue weight). RexSueciae (talk) 12:02, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, there is more than enough here to write about this. MJ9674 (talk) 12:24, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, the Vice article looks pretty good. "That man, according to both Eden’s note and direct messages which she sent at the time and were reviewed by VICE News, was Michael Pocalyko, CEO of Special Investigations" - now that a reliable source explicitly mentions Pocalyko and has done some basic fact checking on the allegations, we can definitely include something on it. Galobtter (pingó mió) 20:37, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Galobtter indeed, and the article has reflected that for the past eight hours. This talk page has gotten a bit disorganized with multiple strands of replies but I think there's broad consensus that adequate sourcing has been achieved to mention Michael Pocalyko's role in the death of Eden Knight. Detransition#Forced detransition of adults mentions Eden by name (although not Pocalyko), and "Eden Knight" redirects there. The next benchmark to cross, I think would be whether the incident warrants a Wikipedia article of its own; it has been discussed so far in The Daily Dot, The Mirror, Dazed magazine, PinkNews, The Independent, Vice, LGBTQ Nation, and most recently Rolling Stone (note that most of these sources do not mention Pocalyko by name). Also, a handful of other sources (INTO, Sportskeeda) of questionable quality. I'll have to think about it. I might try it tonight if nobody else has done it already. RexSueciae (talk) 20:54, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
WP:BLP1E and WP:AVOIDVICTIM would come into play for an article about Eden, from a quick search there doesn't seem to be much if any reliable sources about her prior to her suicide. A Suicide of Eden Knight article might be possible, though I'd advise editors drafting it to search through the AfD archives for nominations of similar suicide of articles to identify what the common policy based rationales are for deleting similar articles when looking at what sourcing is available. Sideswipe9th (talk) 23:59, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Sideswipe9th I was thinking Death of or something along those lines, yeah. I count eight reliable sources and I'm not sure if we should wait for more. RexSueciae (talk) 01:02, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There's a flowchart at WP:NCDEATH for the naming conventions for most death related articles, following it for this would give Suicide of as the article title over the alternatives.
It's not just an issue of source quantity and quality. I recently created an article about the recent killing of a transgender teen in the UK, and it was nominated for deletion about 4 hours after it was created. One of the most common issues to come up was WP:NOTNEWS and WP:NSUSTAINED. Even though killings of that nature are rare in the UK, a lot of editors felt as though it was not a noteworthy enough event, despite having sufficient sources to meet WP:GNG. Articles on deaths, where the death is the primary determiner for noteworthiness seem to be more difficult to keep, than an article on the death of a previously noteworthy person.
Having recently gone through this process of drafting, followed by a swift AfD nomination, my advice would be to make sure that you look at why similar articles have been nominated for deletion, and try to identify why certain articles are kept while others are deleted. Sideswipe9th (talk) 01:16, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Another thing that should be noted is that any article about Eden's suicide would fall into an ArbCom-designated contentious topic area, courtesy of WP:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gender and sexuality. (Because the topic involves "any gender-related dispute or controversy and associated people", Pocalyko's article also falls into that area due to his involvement.)
I generally do not encourage newer editors to work in contentious topic areas because they are fraught at the best of times and suffer newcomers very poorly. —Jéské Couriano (No further replies will be forthcoming.) 16:37, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Jéské Couriano This ain't my first rodeo. Suicide of Eden Knight is now published. RexSueciae (talk) 20:09, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why do we have a Ukrainian name in lead sentence of a U.S.-born person whose parents were also U.S.-born?

[edit]

I find it a bit odd that we're placing a Ukrainian-language name in the lead for an article about someone who was born in the United States, lived their whole life in the United States, and is described as being from a a devout Hungarian Lutheran blue collar family in the article. He has grandparents from Ukraine, but is having grandparents from Ukraine enough to warrant that Ukrainian-language name in the lead? I'm a bit confused here; I can't imagine us doing this for third-generation Italian immigrants, like Bruce Springsteen (or even second-generation Italian immigrants, like Frank Sinatra), so I don't quite get why we have the Ukrainian name here. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 17:02, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good question. It's also in the infobox box for native_name, although the infobox guidance says that field is for The person's name in their own language, if different.. There is nothing in the article to support that Pocalyko's language is Ukrainian. Schazjmd (talk) 17:09, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Along those lines, I've removed it from the article. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 17:11, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Updating Pocalyko's professional details

[edit]

While WP:BLP prevents any details regarding the Eden Knight allegations from being added to Pocalyko's page, I do think it's prudent that we update his page to mention his position as CEO of SI (Special Investigations Limited Company), a government contractor and cybersecurity/private investigation firm. Given that he claims to have this position on his own public LinkedIn page, I see no reason why it can't be added while still complying with BLP.

I've found 3 independent sources that corroborate Pocalyko is CEO of SI:

Ithinkiplaygames (talk) 18:37, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So all three of those sources are probably not independent sources -- they look like profiles where the subject likely submitted the content to be published, possibly for promotional purposes. That doesn't mean they can't be used, since if the subject of an article says something uncontroversial about themselves then you can usually quote them on that, but there's limits. I'd go with the profile from the school district if we're choosing from among the three. RexSueciae (talk) 19:36, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Just added a paragraph to the career section about SI using all three sources. I agree that, since this particular claim isn't likely to be controversial, these possibly self-published sources are fine. The Midnite Wolf (talk) 08:44, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
none of those are reliable sources -- In actu (Guerillero) Parlez Moi 15:45, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Guerillero @In actu I think things have gone off the rails here. Saying that Pocalyko is the CEO of Special Investigations is not controversial or contentious. The Special Investigations website says so, his site says so, and Fraud Magazine (a source used in several other Wikipedia articles) says so in this profile. There are probably sources already used in this article that say so. If nothing else, the Vice article about Eden Knight says so, so it doesn't seem reasonable to use that source but exclude the fact that Polcalyko is CEO. ☰ Hamburger Menu (talk) 16:11, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I went ahead and swapped in Fraud Magazine as a source for the info that he is in fact CEO of Special Investigations. Looks good? RexSueciae (talk) 16:32, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@RexSueciae It's a start, but honestly, the whole article is out of date. Monticello Capital has been just a holding company since 2018. Special Investigations has been Pocalyko's focus for years. ☰ Hamburger Menu (talk) 16:45, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Hamburger Menu good point, WP:UNDUE and all. A lot of the Monticello Capital stuff is cited to news releases / promotional content / his business partner's website, just to name some examples, and much of the article is identical to what the page's original creator, User:SSHammond, banged out in 2012. Although I don't think SSHammond has been active on the wiki in the past decade, ever since he made the article for Pocalyko + Pocalyko's novel. Might need to trim some stuff -- if it was notable then, it ought to still be notable now, but doubt it's all notable. RexSueciae (talk) 16:53, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@RexSueciae I don't want to get myself in trouble here, but it looks a lot like SSHammond was only on Wikipedia to promote Michael Pocalyko. Some trimming is probably overdue. ☰ Hamburger Menu (talk) 17:45, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Hamburger Menu oh for sure. I don't think anyone would get in trouble for saying it, those concerns were raised years back (and that's all I'll say about that owing to Wikipedia's rules on doxing but it's clear from SSHammond's explanation and from publicly available information that he is probably acquainted IRL with the subject of the article, even if they're not the same person). RexSueciae (talk) 18:13, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nearly every source discussing Pocalyko's business achievements names his role in the water treatment infrastructure corporation Erdevel Europa in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. He is named as a founder of Erdevel by the Council for Foreign relations here and here and additionally as chairman of Erdevel by Forbes, the United States Security and Exchange Commission, Marquis Who's Who, and Fraud Magazine, all of which are already listed as sources here. Monticello Capital's website names "Erdevel Europa in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (Riyadh)" among their "most significant investments" and the Fraud Magazine article names it among his "greatest achievements". Special Investigation's website also claims he served as chairman of "Erdevel Europa in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia". Erdevel Europa's website lists an address in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia and claims they receive 5,000,000 Saudi Riyals (~1.3 million USD) from the Saudi government's Ministry of Investment.
Pocalyko also names himself in his LinkedInpage as "Founder, chairman and chief executive officer" of Erdevel and lists the company in his experience three separate times for their branches in Luxembourg, in Milan, Italy, and in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
This is clearly not a controversial claim given the overabundance of sources including those he has personal control over. It seems odd to neglect to mention in this article that he founded a company in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia which is also funded by the Saudi government, given the allegations of him working for Eden Knight's father, Fahad Al-Shathri, (as identified by Rolling Stone and LGBTQ Nation), a Riyadh based Saudi government official as attested to by the previous two news articles as well as Bloomberg and the Saudi government here and here. Anthroqueer (talk) 15:09, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Anthroqueer Good find. That would probably go under "Investment banking and business" in the article. Incidentally, it's curious that there's more space devoted to his navy career than to his business career -- I figure that's one place that might need judicious trimming. RexSueciae (talk) 15:45, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have WP:XC perms so I can't add this myself. I would recommend not including the government funding part as I can't find a source to corroborate other than EE's website, and it seems like it might be written by a non-native English speaker so I could be misunderstanding. Anthroqueer (talk) 21:24, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, righto. If nobody else does it, I'll fix things right up. One thing that just occurs to me is that Marquis Who's Who is almost certainly not a reliable source (and the Forbes profile is similar) -- both are essentially self-published and promotional -- so we should probably prune both of those from the article as it stands right now. (There might be situations when we'd use them but I feel this is more insight into the circumstances behind the article's original creation.) RexSueciae (talk) 21:35, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Allegations of involvement in death of Eden Knight

[edit]

As far as I can tell, the allegations against Michael Pocalyko are exactly that - allegations. Even if they are repeated in reliable sources, they are still just allegations. Should they be included here? ☰ Hamburger Menu (talk) 20:30, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. For the purposes of Wikipedia, nothing is “just” an allegation if it is reported as a major story in multiple credible news outlets.
We don’t permit extrapolations beyond the actual reports - they remain allegations, not independently proven facts, and should be discussed as such in the article - but we have zero reason to omit them if the fact of the allegation is notable in itself. Pseudo-Pseudo-Dionysius (talk) 20:43, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
My understanding as well. Right now we've got at least three reliable sources, by my count, that mention the allegations with specificity (and not just "two American fixers"). More detailed information can be found in the other article, if necessary. RexSueciae (talk) 21:05, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ditto. We can report on the allegations themselves since we have the sources to corroborate them, but we cannot go beyond that until other news outlets do. —Jéské Couriano (No further replies will be forthcoming.) 22:27, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Jéské Couriano I see that you have a lot of experience here and I'm sure you are more familiar with how the rules are interpreted, but the page you linked to says "A living person accused of a crime is presumed innocent until convicted by a court of law. Accusations, investigations and arrests do not amount to a conviction. For individuals who are not public figures; that is, individuals not covered by § Public figures, editors must seriously consider not including material—in any article—that suggests the person has committed, or is accused of having committed, a crime, unless a conviction has been secured.". Is Michael Pocalyko a public figure? ☰ Hamburger Menu (talk) 22:59, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Prominent businessman, political candidate, successful novelist -- I think he's a public figure. Now, that aside, this very article was (possibly) created in a promotional or awe-filled manner (the original author claimed to be a former classmate and presumably a friend of the subject), so weigh that against whatever calculus is influenced by the fact that he has a wiki page. RexSueciae (talk) 23:56, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@RexSueciae It sounds like you are saying that the rules should be applied differently if we think that the article was intended to be promotional. I don't agree with that and I don't agree that Michael Pocalyko is a public figure. ☰ Hamburger Menu (talk) 03:37, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Hamburger Menu Not saying the rules should be applied differently if the article was promotional -- what I meant was that a lot of people, if they hear someone has a wiki page, they think, "ah, they're famous!" And that if anyone is tempted to look at this article and think "huh, he's had a wiki page for like a decade now, he must be a public figure," they should temper that against the fact that the original author said on his talk page that he was a classmate of Pocalyko. Anyways. I think I should also point out that this article doesn't actually say that its subject committed a crime, or is accused of committing a crime (although it may imply it). RexSueciae (talk) 03:43, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@RexSueciae Having a page on Wikipedia does not make someone a "public figure" even if people mistakenly think that. ☰ Hamburger Menu (talk) 03:48, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Hamburger Menu Yes. That is correct. But to reiterate, for the reasons I described earlier, I think he's a public figure, and I think there's consensus on this talk page for mentioning Pocalyko in the context of the suicide of Eden Knight. RexSueciae (talk) 11:26, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Streamlining page content

[edit]

Alright, y'all. There's been some recent activity on the page (not all of it productive), but how much of what's currently listed in this biography is no-shit notable? Obviously, deleting sections en masse is probably not the best way to solve things (nor is it necessarily the best idea to outright call him a trafficker, unless a bunch of stuff happens), but a lot of these references don't really go anywhere. A lot of the "early life" details are sourced to content written by Pocalyko himself (which might be usable in certain circumstances -- I find it excessive, though, to source the first half-dozen or so references to editorials written by the article's subject to a local newspaper). I don't doubt that Pocalyko is related to Stepan Bandera but the source for that claim (an obituary) does not contain that information. A lot of the sources verge on original research (e.g. citing issues of a literary magazine to support the claim that he published in literary magazines, citing a book to support the claim that he was involved in the publication of a "widely cited" book). And there were concerns expressed a couple sections up about various aspects of his professional career.

Is there consensus to go through and review the sources used in this article? I'd tag User:SSHammond who created the page but they seem to be inactive. (As noted previously, they appear to have a personal connection with the article's subject, being a former classmate.)

Also, I made a request for a possibly relevant source on the resource exchange page, so if anyone has a subscription to Intelligence Online (or money to burn), might be worth taking a look. RexSueciae (talk) 20:18, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'd support a massive cut down. Most of the article is fluff. Galobtter (talk) 20:46, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Obvious whitewashing

[edit]

This article is too positive for someone who "allegedly" caused the death of a trans woman. What's all that about? LilianaUwU (talk / contributions) 23:11, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@LilianaUwU please see previous section -- this article was created years ago by another user, who dedicated it to Pocalyko's career accomplishments. At some point, editors probably ought to prune the article's contents. In the meantime, the text prominently mentions Eden Knight and links to that other article. RexSueciae (talk) 23:37, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't forgotten about this, but have been quite busy. The many refs to local newspapers to cite the fact that he wrote columns for local newspapers would be an easy place to start; need to think about this. RexSueciae (talk) 23:51, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Michael_Pocalyko&oldid=1209789409"