Talk:Gabe Newell

Article says Gabe Newell is the wealthiest person in the video game industry but that's wrong afaik

Not sure who actually is the wealthiest but I do know the wealthiest person in my state is Tim Sweeney, and he is in the video game industry. Article says Gabe Newell has a net worth of 3.9 billion, but Tim Sweeney has a net worth of 4.7 billion, so that would make Gabe Newell very much not the wealthiest person in the video game industry. Jcrawl16 (talk) 08:38, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

I've edited the phrasing to clarify that this is according to a source (and not given directly in Wikipedia's voice). Popcornfud (talk) 10:53, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

It says estimated as ONE OF the richest people in the videogaming industry, not THE richest person. 2603:6000:AB00:4E1F:714E:28C6:D5DE:B64 (talk) 04:52, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

---

The article intro current says:

"He has been estimated as _one_ of the wealthiest people in _the United States_ and _the_ wealthiest person in the _video games industry_"

• I don't think "one of the wealthiest in the US" is appropriate. It suggests to me top 10 or 50, or something. He's only a lowly top 260 or so :). Surely wealthy, but that's inferable by the fact he's a billionaire (though possibly top third).

• In the game industry he trades blows with Tim Sweeney, who's often been considered richer in the last 5 years or so, though that's in flux.

The current Wikipedia article mentions that in 2021 Newell was considered the richest according to the book "The History of Video Games", but there's no link to the actual book text. On the other hand, the Forbes estimate for 2021 disagrees: Sweeney $4.7B, Newell $4.1B. Bloomberg's estimates are different, but even there throughout most of 2021 they estimated Sweeney in the lead vs Newell.

I'll tweak the body text as well, but for the intro I suggest:

"He has been occasionally estimated to be the wealthiest person in the video games industry, trading blows with Tim Sweeney"

galenIgh 13:03, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

1) The "one of the wealthiest people" statement is cited to two reliable sources. And at the time Forbes made the estimate, they named him one of the 100th richest. (Besides, if you're merely the 260th-richest person that still puts you in the top 0.00007%, which would qualify in my book.)

2) I've updated the link to the History of Video Games citation to point directly to a Google Books URL with the Newell about him being the wealthiest person in the industry.

3) Your suggested phrasing is clunky and colloquial, so we can't use it. But I'll update the article with the latest Bloomberg and Forbes sources you provide. Popcornfud (talk) 13:23, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Actually, I'm not sure we can use these Bloomberg and Forbes sources as they appear to be real-time trackers of their moving stock value. That seems to make them unsuitable for sources on Wikipedia, or at least weird... it would require us to keep checking these pages and updating the Wikipedia articles for the rest of time. If you want to use these sources, you could start a discussion at WP:VG perhaps. Popcornfud (talk) 13:28, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Real-time trackers – on Forbes there's a history graph showing valuation per year (Bloomberg is finer resolution).

Book – Thanks for updating the book link. Though it doesn't shed more light, just an unqualified statement there. Released in 2021, I thought maybe it refers to data from 2020, but even then according to Forbes' yearly summary Sweeney was estimated higher: Newell $3.5B, Sweeney $4.5B.

Of wealthiest in the US – May have been warranted to call him that in 2017 when he was top 100, but with today's standing I find it misleading. The whole thing started when I first read it I went searching because it seemed like a puzzling statement. He's been out of the top 100 in recent years. The Forbes yearly position for each year since 2020: #186, #289, #285, #267. Obviously a billionaire, and that's enough to make it/him notable. More qualification beyond that is suggestive that he's notable in the group of billionaires, but that isn't the case.

Colloquial – the exact phrasing isn't the important point. It's the essence. Especially not being "the", and the comparison to Sweeney. galenIgh 14:29, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

The sourced statements in the article body say:

• In October 2017, Forbes listed Newell among the 100 wealthiest people in the United States
• According to Charlie Fish, the author of The History of Video Games, as of 2021 Newell was the richest person in the video game industry.

So the statement in the lead (He has been estimated as one of the wealthiest people in the United States and the wealthiest person in the video games industry) is an accurate reflection of what the sourced statements in the article say — he has been estimated to be both of those things, regardless of whether he remains those things today. (If anything the wording in the lead is possibly too qualified, as the Fish source doesn't "estimate" him as the wealthiest person, it directly states he is the richest person at the time of writing. We should be sticking to the source, after all.)

We can definitely update the article with sources that make other claims, but I'm not sure any of the sources you've provided are usable for Wikipedia, for the reason I gave above. The gamesindustry.biz article seems usable, but it's from Jan 2019, whereas the Fish book is from 2021, so it doesn't make the statement that he has been named the richest person any less true. Popcornfud (talk) 14:47, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

As per similar statements on my user talk, I'm voicing my support for Popcornfud's arguments here. -- ferret (talk) 15:47, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Top in US – To satisfy both, instead of vague wording I suggest: "In 2017 he was ranked the 97th wealthiest person in the United States, but he has since dropped lower".

Usability of Forbes and such – as said earlier, they don't only show "realtime" data but also the history of previous years.

Book – Not sure why give it more credence than more reliable and notable sources. "Book" trumps "web"? Both the book and author seem unnotable. Forbes is far more notable, and being a primary source doesn't rule it out. It's only a simple numerical comparison, no need to wait for some secondary source to say so. galenIgh 16:10, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

I agree with Popcornfud's logic as well. Sergecross73 msg me 16:26, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

If having a secondary source reproduce he Forbes 400 list, and with an .edu veneer, makes it "better" in someone's eyes, Table B.9 in the appendix of "Top Wealth in America: New Estimates under Heterogeneous Returns" (here or doi:10.1093/qje/qjac033) is an Oct 2021 snapshot of the data, with #122 Sweeny $7.4B, and #294 Newell $3.9B. galenIgh 22:59, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

"anti-software technology" should be "anti-piracy technology"

"anti-software technology" should be "anti-piracy technology".

"At a technology conference in Seattle that year, Newell argued that software piracy was best addressed by offering a superior option rather than pursuing anti-software technology." RelatedTitle (talk) 20:10, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

So it should. Fixed. Thanks. Popcornfud (talk) 20:13, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Add as co-founder of StarFish Neuroscience company

Following the long-term interest in the Brain Machine Interface (BCI), he co-founded the Starfish Neuroscience company, based in Bellevue, WA, USA. Company works both on invasive sensors/actuators and Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS). Mawerick mc (talk) 09:16, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Edit Request: Gabe's Personal Life - Partner Incorrect

The article states "He was with a new partner, Teagan Klein, as of 2020" Under citation 35. However, this is not correct. Ms. Klein in this case, is the partner of the friend Alex Riberas, also mentioned in the citation. It reads: "Mr. Newell was travelling with a group including Spanish Aston Martin racecar driver Alex Riberas and his partner Teagan Klein" BraveByDefault (talk) 19:52, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. GSK (talk • edits) 23:59, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

@GSK I'm confused about your response here. I'll take a look in a moment, but the edit request is alleging that an existing source is being misused and pointing out exactly how. -- ferret (talk) 00:06, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

The source for the original statement was a now dead link, and I wasn't about to change it or remove it without a reliable source to back up BraveByDefault's statement. I saw it as erring on the side of caution. GSK (talk • edits) 00:14, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

@GSK It has an archive, and this is a BLP claim so requires us to try to address it. I've handled. -- ferret (talk) 00:15, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Removed. No evidence this was ever intended to indicate a romantic relationship between Newell and Klein. Instead, Klein is a manager for The Heart of Racing who is romantic partners with Riberas, see this source with no mention of Newell. -- ferret (talk) 00:15, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

I think this was my mistake — thanks all for catching and correcting. Popcornfud (talk) 03:48, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 September 2024

After mentioning that Gaben left Microsoft, it says “to found Valve”. That’s is horribly incorrect as it should be “and found Valve”. Thank you for coming to my TED Talk 216.126.254.119 (talk) 02:16, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: No explanation on why the mention is wrong, not to mention the weird irrelevant TED talk thing. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 02:29, 18 September 2024 (UTC)