Jump to content

Talk:Elon Musk

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former featured article candidateElon Musk is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Good articleElon Musk has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Did You Know Article milestones
DateProcessResult
June 4, 2021Good article nomineeListed
July 24, 2021Peer reviewNot reviewed
August 23, 2022Featured article candidateNot promoted
November 1, 2022Good article reassessmentKept
Did You Know A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on June 15, 2021.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Elon Musk lost $16.3 billion in a single day, the largest in the history of the Bloomberg Billionaires Index?
Current status: Former featured article candidate, current good article

Proposal to Update Elon Musk’s Introduction to Include “Far-Right Political Influencer”

[edit]

Elon Musk, known for his ventures in technology and business, has engaged in activities aligning with far-right ideologies, despite his denials. Notable instances include:

• Endorsement of Germany’s AfD Party: Musk publicly supported the Alternative for Germany (AfD), a party classified by German intelligence as a suspected extremist organization. He stated that only the AfD can “save” Germany, aligning himself with their nationalist and anti-immigration stance.

• Platform Amplification of Far-Right Figures: Under Musk’s leadership, X (formerly Twitter) has reinstated accounts of individuals known for promoting bigotry, extremism, and misinformation, facilitating the spread of far-right ideologies.

• Dissemination of Far-Right Content: Musk has shared and engaged with content from far-right influencers, contributing to the normalization and dissemination of extremist viewpoints.


These actions demonstrate Musk’s alignment with far-right ideologies, contradicting his public denials.


Proposed Change:


Current Introduction: “…is a businessman known for his key roles in the space company SpaceX and the automotive company Tesla, Inc. …”


Proposed Introduction: “…is a businessman and far-right political influencer known for his key roles in the space company SpaceX and the automotive company Tesla, Inc. …”


Rationale:


Wikipedia strives to provide a comprehensive and neutral perspective on public figures. Musk’s endorsements of extremist political parties, amplification of far-right figures, and dissemination of far-right content are significant aspects of his public persona. Gnarledge (talk) 07:31, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Using the term “Far right” is simply an attempt to cast a slur against him. He was a democrat for most of his life and Musk has often been described as libertarian,[1] but also describes himself as "politically moderate".[2] JamieBrown2011 (talk) 07:53, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note your wording: Musk was a Democrat and describes himself as politically moderate. However, recent actions speak louder than self-descriptions or past tendencies. His recent endorsements of far-right political parties and amplification of extremist content on X demonstrate a clear shift toward far-right ideologies. Even this Wikipedia page and others acknowledge his movement toward the right wing.
Furthermore, your immediate characterization of this proposal as an 'attempt to cast a slur' lacks substantiation. I have made a concerted effort to provide evidence supporting my claims, including Musk’s specific actions and their alignment with far-right ideologies. This is not polemic but a factual observation backed by reputable sources. Gnarledge (talk) 08:09, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What he describes himself doesn't really matter per WP:PRIMARY.
However, to the original point – to begin with we need sources that use this wording before we can even start the discussion. — Czello (music) 08:31, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@JamieBrown2011
no, it is not only a slur because it is backed by political theory and documented evidence.
concrete wording can can be discussed.
maybe he is only a far right activist by German standards but not by American standards. Aberlin2 (talk) 15:28, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. JacktheBrown (talk) 13:17, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@JacktheBrown what is your reason to oppose? Aberlin2 (talk) 15:43, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose and I'm sorry but this just looks like it was directly copied and pasted out of Chat GPT. Big Thumpus (talk) 04:06, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Big Thumpus
This is a criticism of the other person's writing style and could also be due to the fact that the person is not a native English speaker, but what about the substantive reasons for your rejection? Aberlin2 (talk) 15:47, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Per FMSky's comment below: WP:COMMONSENSE Big Thumpus (talk) 00:17, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The most you could do is "politician", this applies even to the losers of WW2. Kenneth Kho (talk) 06:09, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Far right or just self-centered? I think his politics are like Trump's, whatever they need to be to get what he wants. No he is not far-right. 16:01, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
I love this radical leftist propaganda. 2601:18C:8183:D410:E04D:DD95:1048:461E (talk) 20:28, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per WP:COMMONSENSE --FMSky (talk) 00:57, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Gnarledge I support this change with some restrictions.
of course this article is in General unbalanced but there should be sources to back this claim in the article. And then the sentence could be something like: ... "is described as far-right activist by multiple..."
hth Aberlin2 (talk) 15:40, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

UTC)

Oppose JamieBrown2011 (talk) 06:02, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose he's a normie 90's liberal. "Far-right" means racial purity and goose-stepping military worship and answering the JQ and all that nonsense, none of which I've ever heard Musk espouse.103.85.36.186 (talk)

References

  1. ^ Luce, Edward (May 24, 2023). "Beware Elon Musk's warped libertarianism". Financial Times. Archived from the original on July 24, 2024. Retrieved July 24, 2024.
  2. ^ Peters, Jeremy W. (April 26, 2022). "The Elusive Politics of Elon Musk". The New York Times. Archived from the original on June 11, 2022. Retrieved June 13, 2022.

Elon Musk is an American

[edit]

MOS:CONTEXTBIO provides the following.

"The opening paragraph should usually provide context for that which made the person notable. In most modern-day cases, this will be the country, region, or territory where the person is currently a national or permanent resident; or, if the person is notable mainly for past events, where the person was such when they became notable."

It is clear that the context is American, and it is not complex. Remember, Wikipedia is not written for the editors who are experts about Elon Musk, Wikipedia is written for readers who look up about Elon Musk the first time. As such, our goal is to orient the readers, not to prevent edit wars between editors. Kenneth Kho (talk) 19:20, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

He seems to have Canadian, South African, and US nationality. Slatersteven (talk) 19:23, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
He is currently permanent resident of the US since 1995 which is the entire time he becomes notable. Kenneth Kho (talk) 19:25, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Which is irrelevant as we are discussing his nationality, not his residency. Slatersteven (talk) 19:27, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"The opening paragraph should usually provide context for that which made the person notable." There is only one - American. Kenneth Kho (talk) 19:34, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
He is not primarily known for being an American, he is primarily known as a businessman. If you take that away, his being American would, not get him an article. I also more that many sources discus his status as a tri-national. Time for others to chip in. Slatersteven (talk) 19:37, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
He is primarily known as an American businessman, he is not that famous elsewhere. Kenneth Kho (talk) 19:40, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We've been through this question countless times on this talk page. MOS:CONTEXTBIO says "should usually", not "must", and the long-standing consensus is that his nationalities should not be included in the opening sentence, as set out in the FAQ above. Rosbif73 (talk) 07:34, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The point is that the FAQ is wrong in saying his nationalities is complex. As you noted, MOS:CONTEXTBIO simply says that he "should usually" be called American businessman. WP:CONSENSUSCANCHANGE applies. Kenneth Kho (talk) 19:29, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sources seem to indicate that he gave up his Canadian and South African citizenships when he became an American (that would be normal too, its really rare for someone to keep a second citizenship and succesfully naturalize in the US), meaning that he was never a trinational and is currently only a national of one country (USA). Horse Eye's Back (talk) 07:36, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please produce one that he has, anything else is OR. Slatersteven (talk) 10:44, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I can't find any that definitively state it one way or another, it seems that Musk is very private with his immigration history and what he says in public is apparently contradictory. I also would note that you're demanding sources but never actually provided any in the first place, what is your source that his status is tri-national? Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:00, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We have sources saying that at one time he was at least one of each, this is why we do not say it. We do not know. Slatersteven (talk) 11:09, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So we do not have sources which discusses his tri-national status? Horse Eye's Back (talk) 20:56, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Make a list of the most notable South Africans in history and he would be in the top 5 among Mandela, Tutu, de Klerk, and Theron… Trillfendi (talk) 21:27, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Kenneth Kho yes agreed! Dennisforeign205 (talk) 15:05, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Investment in Bihar India

[edit]

Bihar 103.170.70.59 (talk) 11:26, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source? Slatersteven (talk) 11:27, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Slatersteven good idea! Dennisforeign205 (talk) 15:04, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

new section:attacks on Wikimedia and DEI

[edit]

since Elon Musk attacked Wikipedia multiple times but auto attacked other projects and business over DEI i think this topic should get a whole section and we got start by collecting sources like the following: https://nypost.com/2024/12/25/business/elon-musk-urges-supporters-not-to-donate-to-wikipedia-over-dei/ Aberlin2 (talk) 23:05, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stuff like this has no business in the article and referring to it as an "attack" isn't NPOV. Big Thumpus (talk) 00:20, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Simp all you want, but what other term would you use for his constant attacks on Wikipedia?
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1871443771424116954 99.189.97.98 (talk) 03:26, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We don't have any right to interfere on how anyone or elon think of Wikipedia, everyone is free to talk however they want. This isn't for censoring and irrelevant stuffs won't be added to the articles. Thisasia  (Talk) 07:46, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But isn't simply mentioning the fact that Mr. Musk - who is an very close advisor to President-Elect Donald J. Trump - called for his followers to not donate to "Wokepedia" (as he and LibsOfTikTok have called Wikipedia) until "they [meant as Wikipedia] restore balance to their editing authority"? Gelbphoenix (talk) 14:39, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If (and when) RS report this has had some kind of impact, maybe. Slatersteven (talk) 14:47, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Come back and try having this conversation again if Elon's personal opinion results in an obvious, broader movement of people not donating to Wikipedia specifically for the reasons he gives. Until then, this is purely speculative and only serves to cast him in a negative light, and is therefore WP:UNDUE. Big Thumpus (talk) 14:50, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Big Thumpus
no, he really publicly attacked Wikipedia on a public Platform with quite a lot of followers.
see also : Wikipedia:Call a spade a spade
Aberlin2 (talk) 17:11, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:NYPOST. Atm, this fails WP:PROPORTION and WP:NOTNEWS. That might change at some point, but for now it falls under "He says a lot of stuff, that doesn't mean it has to be in the article." There is more coverage on this like [1], but per WP:DAILYKOS we shouldn't use that either. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:00, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
we really don't need to include every beef that elon musk has with a company or product or celebrity on here. See WP:NOTGOSSIP.
Until he actually does something noteworthy, it is WP:UNDUE. Bluethricecreamman (talk) 18:27, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per [2] it's possible donations to WMF increased a little because of Musk's recent comments. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:05, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oligarch

[edit]

Adding the description of oligarch to Elon Musk would be the best way to describe both the power and influence he has in America. He has surpassed the qualifications and should thusly be categorized as one. NorthCentralKing (talk) 01:11, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per WP:UNDUE Big Thumpus (talk) 02:31, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agree accorsing to merriam- webster dictionary:
-oligarch: a member or supporter of oligarchy.
-oligarchy:
1
government by the few
2
a government in which a small group exercises control especially for corrupt and selfish purposes
also  : a group exercising such control
An oligarchy ruled the nation.
3
an organization under oligarchic control
Millionaires and billionaires can be considered as few in relation with the overall US population. A government entirely or with a majority of them, qualify Renzocht (talk) 03:00, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. It should be mentioned in the lead. Firecat93 (talk) 03:37, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Whilst I think that is a good description for American billionaires, I think it is not politically neutralKevinTheSeaCucumber (talk) 12:46, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

no work permit when working for zip2

[edit]

His lack of work permit when founding zip2 is relevant given his views on open borders, the fact he didn't have US citizenship yet illegally worked for in the US on a student visa should be mentioned. It's mentioned later in the article but if the less mentions zip2, it should mention that his work for zip2 was illegal.

Alternatively the lede should strip any mention of the illegal work.

Sources: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2024/oct/26/elon-musk-illegal-immigration https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/10/26/elon-musk-immigration-status/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/stuartanderson/2024/10/27/what-elon-musk-working-illegally-says-about-the-immigration-system/ 99.189.97.98 (talk) 03:17, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dickipedia

[edit]

Musk's proposal is still valid. So, he says, "Rename Wikipedia to Dickipedia, I'll donate 1bln$". It's a notable news and opinion about Wikipedia that shall be mentioned in his biography. 109.245.199.130 (talk) 07:45, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@109.245.199.130
yes I think it should be Mentioned in context with the other attacks on Wikipedia and DEI. could you please add a reliable source for your claim. Aberlin2 (talk) 11:34, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say this is the only context in which you could mention it. However, if there are no reliable sources for his beef with Wikipedia, and it's not notable enough to have been widely reported, it isn't worth it. One random sentence plonked in the middle of the article about something he tweeted isn't worth it. If we did that for everything he tweeted, we'd never hear the end of it.—Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) ({{ping}} me!) 11:58, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, as it tells us nothing about anything. Slatersteven (talk) 11:47, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is covered at Views of Elon Musk#Wikipedia Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:42, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Horse Eye's Back it should be covered in the planned section: attacks on Wikipedia and DEI Aberlin2 (talk) 23:02, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Musk political career

[edit]

I wonder why Musk and Vivek political infobox was constantly removed or is DODGE not a govt agency but just an institution? Thisasia  (Talk) 07:58, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps it's too soon? Firecat93 (talk) 08:27, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Because it isn’t a real government body in any sense of the word. 47.214.192.148 (talk) 03:56, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It will be added when its formed follosing jan 20. We cant say that Musk co-chairs a government agency, if that government agency doesnt exist yet EarthDude (talk) 16:14, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RfC: Mentioning Oligarch Characterization in Lead

[edit]

Musk is the wealthiest person in the world. He has been described as an oligarch by prominent commentators, academics, and experts.

Should a variant of the following sentence be included in the lead?

Due to his considerable influence over American government policy, politics, media, industry, and public discourse, some academics and politicians have characterized Musk as an American oligarch.[3][4][5][6][7][8][9]

Does this addition have any support? Are there any other suggestions? (Some editors have argued that Musk should directly be referred to as an oligarch in the lead. I now agree with those that oppose doing so per WP:UNDUE.) Firecat93 (talk) 08:33, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support I support this course of action.
Here are just a few notable examples of prominent commentators, academics, and experts who have characterized Musk as an oligarch:
This characterization has received significant media coverage, especially in the past year.
Influential Russian billionaires such as Roman Abramovich are referred to as oligarchs in their article leads, as there is consensus in RS that they are oligarchs. This is clearly not true in the case of American billionaires like Musk. However, I believe that this characterization should still be briefly described in the lead in as neutral a way as possible.
For reference, Oxford Languagues' Google dictionary defines an oligarch as, "a very rich business leader with a great deal of political influence."

From the Business Oligarch Wikipedia Page: A business leader can be considered an oligarch if some of the following conditions are satisfied:
  1. uses monopolistic tactics to dominate an industry;
  2. possesses sufficient political power to promote their own interests, often exacerbating income inequality and corruption, particularly through policies that benefit the elite at the expense of the majority.
  3. controls multiple businesses, which intensively coordinate their activities.
Firecat93 (talk) 08:35, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree, per WP:NOTGOSSIP regarding leads of BLPs, "News reporting about celebrities and sports figures can be very frequent and cover a lot of trivia, but using all these sources would lead to overly detailed articles that look like a diary."
Additionally, per lead policy, "The lead section is an introduction to an article and a summary of its most important contents."
1. Does Musk's article go into more detail about him being an oligarch? The article must, if it is going to be considered summarizing the article's contents.
2. And do we believe calling him an oligarch is one of the most important contents? I don't believe so. Pistongrinder (talk) 19:43, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per the items in Firecat93's Business Oligarch list, I see only the last example as true. This seems like the purpose of the post is a derogatory one, as the term Oligarch usually applies to Russians. It's one thing in a legacy or speculation section, but the lead??? Not a good fit. I'm sure there are even more people that would describe him as something like a benevolent genius, where I'm sure he is closer to something in the middle ground. Fyunck(click) (talk) 10:01, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Fyunck(click) Regardless of whether or the label applies, Musk has been described as an oligarch by academics and experts such as Robert Reich, Paul Krugman, and Fiona Hill. I am not advocating that we describe Musk as an oligarch. My suggestion is that we briefly mention that he has been characterized as in the lead.
    Due to his considerable influence over American government policy, politics, media, industry, and public discourse, some academics and politicians have characterized Musk as an American oligarch.
    I've listed some examples of this characterization in my comment above such as House Rep. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.)'s description of Musk as an "unelected oligarch" [29] Firecat93 (talk) 17:58, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Look, we all know how politics is these days. If you are on the opposing side you're nothing short of Godzilla out to destroy the world. That isn't encyclopedic, and it's undue weight. As I had said, and what we do with many sports figures, in a legacy section or political enemy section, it could fit.... but it is certainly not something we would put in the lead. Fyunck(click) (talk) 18:52, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Firecat93 Support
reasons:
the duck test: The "duck test" is a form of reasoning that identifies something based on its observable characteristics: "If it looks, swims, and quacks like a duck, it likely is a duck".Applied to Elon Musk as an oligarch, critics like Bernie Sanders argue that Musk's immense wealth and political influence resemble characteristics of oligarchy- concentrated power in the hands of the wealthy.Musk's actions, such as pressuring lawmakers and influencing government decisions, align with this critique, fitting the "duck test" for oligarchic behavior.
International perception: sources should still be collected by expanding the relevant section of the article but internationally musk has been perceived as Oligarch.
Elon Musk has been characterized as an oligarch internationally, particularly in Germany and Britain:
Germany: Politicians like Dennis Radtke (CDU) and Anton Hofreiter (Greens) condemned Musk's endorsement of the far- right AfD, calling it a threat to democracy, "Haken dran" and "Lanz und Precht" discussed him as an Oligarch.
Britain: Media outlets like Spiked and Byline Times referred to Musk as a "foreign oligarch" due to his rumored $100 million donation to Nigel Farage's Reform UK party, raising concerns about foreign influence in politics Aberlin2 (talk) 10:32, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
By virtue of a "duck test," Musk would also be an engineer. The ASCE and other sources have described him as such. So if a "duck test" and having some quantity of experts stating as such does not justify being described as an "engineer" on this page, then neither is it sufficient for "oligarch." Foonix0 (talk) 11:53, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Foonix0 Hi, thank you for your reply.
so, when is it possible for you to describe him or to call him an Oligarch or will you always move the goalposts? Aberlin2 (talk) 16:53, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
also I'm noticing, actually the discussion is not wether he is or is not an Oligarch but If it should be mentioned that people seem to perceive him as such. what do you think about this? Aberlin2 (talk) 16:56, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Aberlin2 Yes, thank you. I apologize if I didn't make this clear: I am not advocating that we describe Musk as an oligarch. My suggestion is that we briefly mention that he has been characterized as one in the lead.
Due to his considerable influence over American government policy, politics, media, industry, and public discourse, some academics and politicians have characterized Musk as an American oligarch.
I've listed some examples in my comment above such as House Rep. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.)'s characterization of Musk as an "unelected oligarch" [30] Firecat93 (talk) 17:53, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Could it be acceptable to briefly mention he has been characterized as an engineer in the lead as per your proposal?
The relevance here is that established standards should be applied in a consistent manner. It's fine to change the standard, but it should be applied consistently. If we don't, then people will pick and choose which standard they want based on their preferred preference, which presents a bias issue. Editors will favor relaxed standards for information they like, and favor more stringent ones for information they don't like. Foonix0 (talk) 01:10, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See the FAQ. QRep2020 (talk) 16:10, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose As we do not fact know how much influence he really has, yet. Also if we have him as an Oligarch would that not mean we have to say this about every rich person who meddles in politics? What makes Musk special? Slatersteven (talk) 10:39, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If every other rich person who meddles in politics has been described as an oligarch in a number of reliable sources, then we can describe them as oligarchs too. That's the only criteria for describing them as such; and this is an RfC on Musk alone, not every article about a rich person who meddles in politics. He's reliably described as an oligarch, he's one of the world's richest men; I would be comfortable describing him as such in-article.—Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) ({{ping}} me!) 12:01, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I am not advocating that we describe Musk as an oligarch. My suggestion is that we briefly mention that he has been characterized as one in the lead.
    Due to his considerable influence over American government policy, politics, media, industry, and public discourse, some academics and politicians have characterized Musk as an American oligarch.
    I've listed some examples in my comment above such as House Rep. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.)'s characterization of Musk as an "unelected oligarch" [31] Firecat93 (talk) 17:52, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Slatersteven I wanted to make this distinction clearer, as it appears that my RfC suggestion was misinterpreted by some editors. Firecat93 (talk) 17:56, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yep, I agree EarthDude (talk) 11:06, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Slatersteven
    if this discussion is only about mentioning his characterisations as Oligarch and not if he in fact is an Oligarch, then the difference is the reception. there are a lot of of rich people who are not characterized as Oligarch by scientists and influential public persons in multiple states across the globe
    hth Aberlin2 (talk) 18:27, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, WP:Spade applies, doubt any reliable source contests it. Some academic sources:
  • Zelinsky 2024: By supporting the Reddit crowd, Musk performed a remarkable persona in-between his elite status as one of the tech oligarchs, at that time the world’s richest person, and his support of the populist cause against the routinized and supposedly immoral establishment.
  • Allcorn 2023
  • Waller 2024: Yet the oversize personality of figures such as Musk and the clear trend towards the oligarchization of near-Earth space settlement…
  • Lipsitz 2024: On the question of Khan, it seems likelier that he’ll take his cues from an oligarch like Musk than from his own vice president.
  • Kampmark 2024
Kowal2701 (talk) 13:09, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Zelinsky 2024 is dated within the GameStop short squeeze. Allcorn 2023 has an indirect association between Musk and oligarchy through X, and I would be hesitant to use it if there are better references. Waller 2024 might be acceptable—though oligarchization is in quotes—but I question if space colonization is the sector that most who claim Musk is an oligarch would identify their claims with. Lipsitz 2024 is an opinion article. Kampmark 2024 mentions Musk being a "tech oligarch" in passing and does not elaborate on that much, analysis that is absent from most of these articles and would greatly strengthen them. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 22:49, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@ElijahPepe
does that mean oppose or support? Aberlin2 (talk) 22:53, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't mean either, and that is not relevant to my comment. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 22:55, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strongly oppose While I personally find it very interesting that the "oligarch" rhetoric ramped up as soon as Musk aligned himself with Trump's campaign, outside of that tidbit Musk's influence on the US government is being greatly exaggerated and this push to label him as an oligarch feels blatantly partisan.
Per Firecat93's comments above, which "monopolistic tactics" are being used to "dominate" an industry? Which industry? How much political power does Musk actually, legally possess? Even if he does possess political power in some way, how is he using it to promote his own interests and thereby exacerbating income inequality and corruption? Which of his businesses are "intensively" coordinating their activities?
Labeling a living person as an "oligarch" is a serious step and should only be taken if there is abundant proof, not just a relatively small collection of highly opinionated political commentators who have spent most of the last decade assigning derogatory titles to people who disagree with them politically. Big Thumpus (talk) 14:06, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The FT is probably the best source we could have, hence why it’s £40 a month. See From Putin to Musk: the making of a modern-day oligarch (2023), I can’t access it but that’ll answer most of your questions Kowal2701 (talk) 15:11, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Does the monthly cost of a source indicate its quality? I can't access it either, so unless someone who has a subscription can provide some quotes from the article for us to analyze it's not very useful. Big Thumpus (talk) 15:30, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It’s useful in that a highly reputable source supports the nom, I used to have access to it, but agreed quotes would be very welcome Kowal2701 (talk) 16:20, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A plain text version of the article's body is available at https://pastebin.com/wKTThszJ.
"First, oligarchs are not simply tycoons. The latter are rich business people who may not have any political power. Lingelbach told me that Elon Musk went from tycoon to oligarch when he bought Twitter last year. The social media company, now renamed X, shapes opinion on events from Ukraine to Israel — often by platforming falsehoods. Today, adds Lingelbach, "Musk is one of the five or 10 most consequential oligarchs in our world."
QRep2020 (talk) 18:33, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay so in that article, the person referring to Elon Musk as an "oligarch", David Lingelbach, just so happens to be the author of the new book the article is entirely about? The article that even states that the definition of oligarch has been "reworked" by the two authors of said book, in order to accommodate the actions of people like Musk? Big Thumpus (talk) 20:02, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Big Thumpus & Kowal2701 - here is an archived copy of the article that is accessible. Isaidnoway (talk) 19:03, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for this Big Thumpus (talk) 20:11, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Kowal2701 I am not advocating that we "label" Musk as an oligarch. My suggestion is that we briefly mention that he has been characterized as one by some academics and politicians in the lead. Firecat93 (talk) 18:35, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Big Thumpus To clarify, I am not advocating that we describe Musk as an oligarch. My suggestion is that we briefly mention that he has been characterized as one in the lead.
Due to his considerable influence over American government policy, politics, media, industry, and public discourse, some academics and politicians have characterized Musk as an American oligarch.
I've listed some examples in my comment above such as House Rep. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.)'s characterization of Musk as an "unelected oligarch" [32] Firecat93 (talk) 17:54, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate the clarification but I still oppose as the opinion of a few politically biased commentators - or at the very least, commentators who may hold negative personal opinions of Musk - is not appropriate for an encyclopedia and certainly not for the lead of an article about a living person. If, say, history rolls on and it turns out in several years that Musk does in fact end up using any political power he might gain to enrich himself, increase corruption, etc. then it would be fine to expand the article. Doing so out of pure speculation before the fact gives the appearance of mud-slinging at the very least. Big Thumpus (talk) 19:56, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Big Thumpus
" a few politically biased commentators" are politicians and scientists from multiple nations around the world. it should of course be expanded in the article ...but still it should be mentioned in the introduction otherwise the article's introduction could seem Like Cherry picked favorable facts about his life.
Aberlin2 (talk) 16:41, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They aren't favorable facts, they're just facts. That he is an oligarch is not a fact; it is the opinion of people who just so happen to also oppose him politically. Not at all appropriate for the introduction, at the very least. Big Thumpus (talk) 16:58, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I could not agree more with this positioning. Pistongrinder (talk) 00:34, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per WP:TOOSOON and rushing this to a RFC after four comments shows a fundamental misunderstanding of WP:RFCBEFORE. Some time needs to pass before we can have a real conversation about this topic. Musk and Trump's current association is being sensationalized and what that means is mostly a lot of speculation for which it appears some of the arguments above have decided to indulge. We do not have a WP:CRYSTALBALL. This is a biography, not a news article. Nemov (talk) 14:48, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Nemov Just as a clarification, I am not advocating that we describe Musk as an oligarch. My suggestion is that we briefly mention that he has been characterized as one in the lead.
    Due to his considerable influence over American government policy, politics, media, industry, and public discourse, some academics and politicians have characterized Musk as an American oligarch.
    I've listed some examples in my comment above such as House Rep. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.)'s characterization of Musk as an "unelected oligarch" [33] Firecat93 (talk) 17:54, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Your clarification doesn't change my argument. People engaging in name calling and speculaction falls considerably short of justification for inclusion here. Nemov (talk) 22:55, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose oligarch, as the lead of our article on Oligarchy states that it's rule by the few, which I don't think really applies here. I would Support plutocrat. Support after clarification from nom Feeglgeef (talk) 16:13, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Regardless of whether or not it applies, he has been described as an oligarch by academics and experts such as Robert Reich, Paul Krugman, and Fiona Hill. I am not advocating that we describe Musk as an oligarch. My suggestion is that we briefly mention that he has been characterized as one in the lead.
Due to his considerable influence over American government policy, politics, media, industry, and public discourse, some academics and politicians have characterized Musk as an American oligarch.
I've listed some examples in my comment above such as House Rep. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.)'s characterization of Musk as an "unelected oligarch" [34] Firecat93 (talk) 17:55, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Feeglgeef Firecat93 (talk) 17:55, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I've changed my comment. Feeglgeef (talk) 17:57, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The term oligarch isn't used much in America, it is a Russian thing and therefore it isn't clear what it means. But he can't be an oligarch in that sense because Trump isn't in power yet. Most of the sources are political opponents of Elon and not reliable. Kruger is an economist not a political scientist. Here he is acting as a pundit. I am troubled about the appeal to authority based on his so-called "Nobel Prize", because it is not relevant. Using the definition of one scholar to decide if Trump is an oligarch is SYNTH. Tinynanorobots (talk) 17:14, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I also oppose "using the definition of one scholar to decide if" Musk or anyone else is an oligarch. The RfC asked whether or not a brief sentence explaining that prominent academics and politicians have characterized Musk as an oligarch should be included in the lead. Firecat93 (talk) 04:26, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - too soon. Also does not meet traditional definition of oligarch, seems like tech oligarch is a new label.
Not sure it'll last. Bluethricecreamman (talk) 18:26, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support: According to Oxford, the definition of an oligarch is "a very rich business leader with a great deal of political influence". Musk ticks of everything here. He's the richest man on earth, with almost half a trillion dollars, and most importantly, he indeed has a great deal of political influence. First of all, he controls one of the world's most popular social media platforms, Twitter, which he has repeatedly used as a tool to promote Trump in the 2024 election, according to countless reliable sources(NBC: https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/social-media/elon-musk-turned-x-trump-echo-chamber-rcna174321, CNN: https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/13/tech/elon-musk-donald-trump-x/index.html, NPR: https://www.npr.org/2024/10/22/nx-s1-5156184/elon-musk-trump-election-x-twitter). According to Al Jazeera (https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2024/11/7/the-elon-musk-effect-how-donald-trump-gained-from-billionaires-support), Musk played a big role in Trump's reelection, taking not just Twitter, but also his sizeable donations, being one of the largest individual donor to the Trump campaign. His recent attempt to not let the government shutdown bill to pass, showed his direct attempt to leverage his wealth and influence in politics, which will only increase once the Trump Administration kicks in from Jan 20, and Musk heads DOGE. This Vox article (https://www.vox.com/money/387348/elon-musk-trump-president-billionaire-oligarchy) directly analyzes and calls out Musk's oligarch status.

EarthDude (talk) 11:03, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So how is his status going now MAGA are telling him to eff off? Slatersteven (talk) 18:31, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose — Taking a look at the six references—a number that automatically raises questions:
    • The first reference is to Business Insider, which is not a reliable source nor an unreliable source per WP:BUSINESSINSIDER. The Insider source links to an opinion article written by Paul Krugman, which might suffice here if Krugman were a qualified individual to make the claim that "petulant oligarchs rule our world"; having read Krugman's article prior to this discussion, one criticism I had of it was that it did not sufficiently associate wealth to power. I re-read it and came to the same conclusion, though I am sure that if it were written recently that Krugman could point to the debt ceiling fiasco. Still, this is not a particularly effective reference.
    • The second reference is to Barron's, which has no reliability at WP:RSP, though it was syndicated from AFP, which would make it generally reliable to use. The AFP article cites a tweet from Robert Reich. Again, the issues with the Krugman reference persist. Reich is not qualified to make the claim that Musk is an oligarch. By the time the article was written—when Twitter had named Musk to its board—Musk had a minimal political influence that primarily benefited his companies, such as his dinner with former president Barack Obama in February 2015.
    • The third reference is to The Hill, which is generally reliable per WP:THEHILL, and from October. The article cites Fiona Hill, but doesn't specifically quote her on claiming that Musk is an oligarch, but rather makes that conclusion from her statements. I continue to be skeptical of who is making these claims, though I suppose this could suffice if necessary.
    • The fourth reference is to The Atlantic, a generally reliable source, and from last week. Ali Breland makes the claim that Musk is an "information oligarch", a term he borrows from Shoshana Zuboff in the Financial Times. However, because the term is effectively a neologism, it can't be given the same weight as "oligarch" because it implicitly requires a suffix that is not widely applied as a subset of oligarchs. If it was, then Musk would be known as an information oligarch, not a general oligarch.
    • The fifth reference is a duplicate of the second.
    • The sixth reference is to Slate, which is no longer present at WP:RSP but is generally reliable regardless. The article is an interview with Jeffrey Winters, who is a political scientist and would be qualified to claim that Musk is an oligarch.
    • The seventh reference is to Newsweek, which should not be used in Trump-related articles per WP:TRUMPRS and WP:NEWSWEEK; the criticisms I have for Newsweek are elaborated in the former and which I recommend reading. Fortunately, the article is relatively acceptable given that it cites Bernie Sanders; unfortunately, it cites a politician, who is clearly not qualified to make this claim.
In all, there are only one or two usable references here. Six is a remarkably low number for a viewpoint that is not in the majority. For instance, Infowars cites thirteen references to claim it is a far-right website, with many of those being scholarly articles. Very few newspapers, if any, have independently made the association between Musk and oligarchy largely because scholars in this field often look at macropolitics with an examination of macroentities, i.e. institutions such as the banking sector. As for the statement in question, in what ways does Musk wield "considerable influence over American government policy, politics, media, industry, and public discourse"? At a base level, many of the references included are not even dated to this year, and the ones that are do not make that connection, save for the Slate interview. Musk does not have influence over government policy—as the spending fight showed, industry—given that the Department of Government Efficiency has not even been formed, or public discourse—a concept I would find it difficult to qualify to begin with. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 22:37, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strongly oppose: If you consider for a moment the hundreds of thousands of articles and media attention given to Elon Musk, and then you consider the number of those sources that call him an oligarch, you simply cannot make a case for WP:DUE period, let alone in the lead. I'm actually very concerned we're considering this idea at all. As a reminder from the policy WP:NOTNEWS and its subsidiary WP:NOTGOSSIP, For example, news reporting about celebrities and sports figures can be very frequent and cover a lot of trivia, but using all these sources would lead to overly detailed articles that look like a diary. I understand the motivation, seeing as some sources do present the label, but this opinion is WP:FRINGE and absolutely does not belong in this WP:BLP, which, by nature of the WP Policy, should err on the side of caution when presenting subjects with labels like this. Pistongrinder (talk) 00:51, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I understand your reasoning. Just to clarify, however, the RfC proposed including a brief sentence explaining that prominent individuals have characterized him as an oligarch. It did not propose to "present" Musk with this label. Firecat93 (talk) 04:21, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose — Elon has only recently obtained any form of political influence, and with someone who isn't even president yet! Under the current administration he was largely shunned (not even invited to the Whitehouse for an EV summit!!) So, WP:DUE and WP:TOOSOON. Not to mention the common understanding of the term "Oligarch" as someone having undue influence in countries where power is highly concentrated, would be a stretch in US politics.JamieBrown2011 (talk) 13:11, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It wouldn't be a stretch in US politics honestly. Most industries and sectors have monopolies by a small number of corporations, and both of the two main political parties have a lot of the same corporate donors. Someone who almost got the government to shut down by using his wealth and influence to Veto a bill, when not even being in office or elected in any way, as Musk recently did, even before the Trump Administration has formed, is a clear sign of oligarchic use of power. Also, quite a few reliable sources state Musk to be a oligarch or similar to an oligarch, so it should definitely be added in the article EarthDude (talk) 16:18, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    With all due respect, I think your facts of that situation are a little tainted. He didn't use his "wealth" to veto that bill. Himself and Vivek made people aware of the contents of the bill (1600 pages of it) and that it was trying to be pushed through congress at the last minute (not even giving senators a chance to read it) and congress itself killed the bill and replaced it with 116 page bill. That is not oligarchs abusing power, that my friend is democracy. JamieBrown2011 (talk) 06:33, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose — Name-calling is weird. Do we need to mention that Pedro Pascal is called "the Internet daddy" in the lede of his article just because a crap ton of results from reliable sources pop up when we google it? No! BarntToust 02:35, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Oligarch is a word that describes, " a very rich business leader with a great deal of political influence ." Describing Musk as an oligarch is not a form of name calling. Firecat93 (talk) 04:19, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Not per most reliable dictionary definitions. Fyunck(click) (talk) 18:52, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
suppose we call every rich dude who speaks with Drumpf last an oligarch? Since the president is notorious for having being swayed by the last fellow whom he speaks with on any given subject. BarntToust 17:27, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@BarntToust no, please read the discussion or the article Aberlin2 (talk) 22:41, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In discussions such as these, I cannot help but notice a pattern. there are two sides. One side shares their thoughts, then the other side shares their thoughts. One side of the discussion cannot bear to let the opinions of the other just exist as they are and everyone on the other side has every particular of their two sentences of two cents bludgeoned. I don't understand why this helps any decisions to be made. Each side must have the merits of their arguments assessed by a closer. If one side's argument is garbage, a closer doesn't need the help of literally everyone in their Majesty's most Loyal Opposition in making this be known. BarntToust 22:59, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The oligarch bit in the article

[edit]

This is the same discussion, same points being made against it being in the lede, are the same as why it shouldn't be in the article. I removed it but have been reverted by someone who has years of almost all their edits related to Elon Musk. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Elon_Musk&diff=1266022297&oldid=1265987435 Just look at the headlines of the referenced news articles. The bias news media is against him for supporting Trump, so they ignore all the other wealthy people and the media which have been influencing politics in America since forever, and focus on him. They aren't calling the billionaires that donated money to their side or influence news media they own for their point of view, by the term oligarch. And the "real president" nonsense is just a ridiculous narrative with no proof that anyone was dumb enough to believe it was real. Dream Focus 16:42, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

yeah, there's been a massive enshittification of pretty much all forms of journalism online nowadays. Think if you've got concerns about overbearing bias in the news, you should take things to WP:RSNB to have them discussed. BarntToust 16:51, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Its not the same discussion... And its "biased" not "bias" (even when accounting for the litany of errors your argument is stupid) Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:54, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
errors of grammar, yet as we know is the indisputable law on the internet, a simple spelling error invalidates one's entire argument. BarntToust 18:24, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thats why I said that errors aside its a stupid argument, from the first sentence to the last its low quality dribble. There is nothing in there of substance to discuss, if they actually want to make a policy and guideline based argument worthy of serious discussion they are free to do so. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 18:43, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Attacks on wikipedia

[edit]
Redundant thread (as acknowledged by the OP), per this discussion above.A. Randomdude0000 (talk) 15:39, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.

obviously it's on going but how he feels about us and other "legacy media" should be added 172.101.136.35 (talk) 04:33, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why? Slatersteven (talk) 11:38, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
He’s made several tweets bashing Wikipedia, asking people to stop donating to the platform, and accusing it of misinformation
https://www.newsweek.com/elon-musk-takes-aim-wikipedia-fund-raising-editing-political-woke-2005742 KevinTheSeaCucumber (talk) 12:42, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Being discussed above, we do not need another thread on it. Slatersteven (talk) 12:43, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Didn't see that oopsie poopsie
Oki we're good then 172.101.136.35 (talk) 15:11, 27 December 2024 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Elon_Musk&oldid=1266243933"