Talk:Jeremy Stoppelman/Archives/2015

Discussion

Focus

Hi, I've made some edits to this article and I'd like to make more but thought I would begin a discussion first. With all due respect to my friend and fellow editor CorporateM (who has openly invited feedback and collaboration on this article--for which I commend him), I find this article to be a bit anecdotal and fluffy. Also, while I don't doubt the notability of the subject, this BLP seems to have the Yelp Inc story weaved into it. There is some coatrack info about the founding of Yelp and when the subject met his future Yelp co-founders and details about how much this company paid for that company etc. Stoppleman has a story but its a simple one that can be told in a simple and straightforward manner and I'm tempted to keep editing it down but will wait to hear from others. Any thoughts on this? -- — Keithbob • Talk • 20:55, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Naturally, there is some redundancy with his article and the Yelp article, and I think that is to be expected. If you read the profile stories on Stoppelman closely, there are several events during his time at Yelp that are brought up by multiple sources that suggest they are the most significant things that took place in his life while working there. The call from Steve Jobs, the growth of the website, and the ringing of the bell at the stock exchange for example were all added after seeing them in multiple sources. A neutral article is representative of the source material, so if the sources about Stoppelman include these, I don't think it's our role as editors to decide to exclude content that's repeated in multiple profile stories on the subject.

I could see some of these trims being justified, but I'm not sure the article is improving as a whole. For example, the PayPal Mafia is a very specific reference repeated in multiple sources. Leaving a broad generality in its place I don't think is better. The San Francisco Chronicle goes into substantial depth about how his interest in computers was sparked by his access to one at an early age. And his time at Yelp is awkwardly missing from the lead. I did exclude his reputation as a well-dressed eligible bachelor, because there are some things Wikipedia has no interest in on principle, but in general we just repeat what the sources say and should not rationalize ignoring the sources.

I am interested in seeing the comments at the RFC on the Yelp page, because I do think that either I am making poor suggestions, or there may be some excessive defensiveness and over-compensation and I'm open-minded about it potentially being the former. If it is, I have some work to do to do better is all. CorporateM (Talk) 21:56, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks CM, I have done a lot of editing and writing on BLP's and I have some clear opinions about how they should be structured and what is encyclopedic and what isn't. At the same time I'm cognizant of the fact that it's not my encyclopedia :-) and I am open to the opinions and views of others. Thanks for expressing your view and concerns. Let's see what other editors think and if some of my deletions need to be reverted then so be it. Cheers! -- — Keithbob • Talk • 13:33, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

I have had a chance to compare the two versions. I don't think it should be reverted, because a lot of that did need to be trimmed. Also, adding heresay to the article is probably a BLP violation, even if properly sourced. However, while I compared the two versions I jotted down some notes in a new section below on some factual errors, excessive trims, etc. I think probably 10-20% of the deleted stuff should be restored, but it would be better to move forward with this version. It's normal for trimming to leave "scar tissue". CorporateM (Talk) 23:50, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

X.com

I have a couple of issues with X.com. Firstly WP has a guideline not to put dot com addresses in article text. When we write about Twitter or Ebay we don't call them Twitter.com or Google.com etc. So we shouldn't be saying X.com....... unless that was the official, legal name of the company. The problem is the only sources I find about X.com are claims made by involved parties such as Elon Musk, Jeremy Stoppelman etc. If I visit the www.x.com website I find that it's now called X.commerce. Any reliable secondary sources that give the give the history of this company and clarify its name and corroborate the claims made by Musk and Stoppleman?? -- — Keithbob • Talk • 20:55, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

PS this info would also be helpful to the articles on Elon Musk, PayPal etc as they have similar issues surrounding X.com. thanks!-- — Keithbob • Talk • 21:18, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

I was wondering where X-commercial came from. The Paypal article covers the context in substantial depth, but mostly with very poor sources. A quick Google Books search[1] reveals much better sources that can verify the context. They do seem to all refer to "x.com" in a way that suggests it may be the actual company name. For example, this reference says: "X.com, an online bank founded by" - it sounds like they are talking about the company, not the website. CorporateM (Talk) 21:22, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

After looking at multiple sources I think you are correct and I have changed the company name back to X.com in this article as well as PayPal, PayPal Mafia and Elon Musk. Thanks for your patience. -- — Keithbob • Talk • 18:20, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Off topic?

To my way of thinking this info (below) is not about Stoppleman and should be removed. -- — Keithbob • Talk • 18:30, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

• Mobile apps also helped the website grow.[20] As of 2010, the company was valued at more than $145 million and had expanded into 17 countries.[3] By 2012, 33 million reviews had been posted on the site.

This is one of those things that were included in profile stories on him, but Wikipedia may exercise different editorial judgements than the source material. IMO, the number of reviews, countries, etc. may be too detailed and off-topic, but it becoming a public company and its current value would be worthwhile, to communicate to the reader the significance of him founding the company. CorporateM (Talk) 19:29, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Maybe it could be rephrased to be more about him and less about the company. I'll see what I can do. -- — Keithbob • Talk • 18:21, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

 Done-- — Keithbob • Talk • 21:38, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

More eyes

Dear CM, I'm sorry that no one responded to the request at BLPN for more eyes. Would you like to invite DGG to look over the article? Or I could invite Collect, or SoftLavender, both of whom have looked over things for me when I've asked them to. SoftLavender says she is a real life writer and editor and I find her to be neutral and fair. Thoughts? -- — Keithbob • Talk • 20:36, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

I trust you. + the GA process will bring us a second pair of eyes. CorporateM (Talk) 22:56, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

OK -- — Keithbob • Talk • 21:39, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

One last-minute thing that comes to mind. There are video interviews of Stoppelman in Bloomberg, with Charlie Rose and in Inc.. I wouldn't consider these reliable sources, but one of the uses of External links is for "Sites that fail to meet criteria for reliable sources yet still contain information about the subject of the article from knowledgeable sources."

Well, I don't think that was intended as a reason to add a bunch of primary sources where the subject talks about himself, but it would be useful for readers to have a handy link where they can hear his voice and see him speak. CorporateM (Talk) 00:33, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

New source

Haven't read it yet (will momentarily), but a new source has come out that may be useful:

• Roberts, Daniel (September 19, 2013). "Yelp CEO Jeremy Stoppelman ignored advice from Elon Musk and Peter Thiel and succeeded anyway". Fortune.

CorporateM (Talk) 16:19, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Comments

"who later became an investor in Stoppleman's company, Yelp Inc"

Stoppelman is a co-founder and he owns a portion of the company, but I don't know if calling it HIS company is quite right.

As co-founder and CEO Stoppleman has guided the company's growth to 33 million user reviews and a $145 million valuation.[3][10][20]

This new source has something that may be a bit better to replace this. From the source: "Since then Yelp (YELP) has grown into a multi-national publicly traded company with 1,700 employees and a market cap of $4 billion"

Mining a few other things in the new source that may or may not be worth including

• "He taught himself guitar by watching videos online."
• His brother's title at the company is VP of engineering
• About five paragraphs down is a summary of the controversy
• The email he sent at Paypal that resulted in him getting promoted is mentioned again

CorporateM (Talk) 01:22, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Jeremy Stoppelman/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Edge3 (talk · contribs) 04:41, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello. I expect this to be a quick review, but I do have some questions that need to be resolved. I begin with the lead and the "early life" sections:

• Please expand the lead section to summarize all of the article's main points, as per WP:LEAD. Specifically, I think one or two extra sentences are needed to discuss Stoppelman's work on Yelp.

• I would like to expand this by putting: "He turned down an acquisition offer by Google and took the company public in 2012." I am a little timid about making this edit on account of my COI, because the Yelp, Inc. page shows a little about how a lot of sources have different speculations on what actually happened RE Google's attempted acquisition, but all the profile stories on Stoppelman say that he turned it down. I think the text as proposed would be on-target, since it's what the sources on Stoppelman say, while the Yelp page may cover it in greater depth. Thoughts? I'll add pings for user:Wikidemon and user:Keithbob here in case they watch their notifications, as both are familiar with the topic. CorporateM (Talk) 11:56, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

I think it's a neutral and accurate reflection of the sources, so I added it. I welcome any further comments. Edge3 (talk) 03:47, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

• This source doesn't explicitly state that he was born in 1977. Also, the infobox mentions that he was born in November 1977, but this isn't sourced either.

 Done I found a source for it, but the source says October, so I changed it. The book I cited also has a 4-page profile on Stoppelman, so I'm also going to look through it. I can send you a copy if you like through old-fashioned email (would have to send attachments). CorporateM (Talk) 12:16, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. You don't need to email me the source. Edge3 (talk) 01:58, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

• In the infobox, is it necessary to say that he's known for co-founding Yelp, when his occupation is already listed as CEO of Yelp? I think the occupation could be kept, and the "known for" field excluded without removing crucial information that's already mentioned in the article body.

 Done

• "Stoppelman attended the University of Illinois and obtained a Bachelor's degree in computer engineering in 1999." -- The source (page 20) says that he graduated in 2000. This source says 1999. Can you explain the discrepancy?

I don't know why the sources conflict, but I would lean towards keeping the 1999 number, since it's what the University itself says. I can fix the citations. CorporateM (Talk) 12:21, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

I agree that 1999 is the year that we should use. Edge3 (talk) 01:58, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

 Done

• Why is this source listed as a reference? It's labeled as the source for "After graduating...", but the source doesn't even mention Stoppelman's graduation. What about this source?

• If you must keep these sources, then maybe you could move the citations to the end of the sentence. It seems silly to cite only the phrase "after graduating" without any further details.

 Done

• Isn't this source similar to this source?

 Done Nice catch! I didn't notice that. According to my library's online database, the original SJ Merc piece is under the title "Q&A: Yelp CEO prizes company's independence" CorporateM (Talk) 12:28, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your contributions. I look forward to your responses. Edge3 (talk) 04:41, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

• Comment: The Internet Innovators book says he was at @Home for six months, while Inc. says four months. The book also says that Stoppelman took a cash-out offer after the eBay acquisition, which may explain his departure (neutral on whether it should be included). It says Yelp was conceived because Stoppelman loved burritos, but I know most sources give the dentist story. The rest of the 4-page profile seems to be on Yelp, rather than Stoppelman. I suspect the source has mediocre reliability, but may be usable. CorporateM (Talk) 12:44, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

The book's description says that it's just a collection of biographies. It seems that WP:TERTIARY would apply. Edge3 (talk) 01:58, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Awww, yes it is. It cites sources, so Inc. seems more reliable. CorporateM (Talk) 02:16, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Moving on to the "Career" section:

• "It was here that Stoppelman met businessman Max Levchin, who later became an investor in Stoppleman's company, Yelp Inc." -- Why are five sources needed for this sentence? It seems excessive.

 Done I remove this source entirely as I trimmed the excess citations (it was not cited anywhere else in the article)

• "Stoppelman became the V.P. of engineering at PayPal..." -- Could you please explain the relevance of the source? It doesn't seem to mention Stoppelman's VP role.

 Done Actually, I don't think that one was my fault - I don't remember seeing/using that source. That's my story anyway and I'm sticking to it! CorporateM (Talk) 03:49, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

• "Levchin persuaded Stoppelman to do an internship at the business incubator, MRL ventures" -- MRL Ventures isn't explicitly named in the sources given.

 Done Added a WSJ source that mentions MRL ventures by name. As an extreme technicality that may be a bit of synthesis, but should be a common sense issue

• "As co-founder and CEO Stoppleman has guided the company's growth to 33 million user reviews and a $145 million valuation." -- Where in the sources can I find these statistics? I might have missed them...

I didn't write that part (not a fan of "has guided" but meh). However I trimmed one cite. 33 million can be found in paragraph 3 of the WSJ source. The NYSE Magazine source actually says it has a $1.19 billion market cap on page 19. I wasn't sure where the valuation came from, but I Googled it and found out that the Associated Press and LA Times reported that Stoppelmans interest in the company was $145 million. CorporateM (Talk) 04:10, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Then perhaps you should rephrase the sentence to discuss the market cap, instead of Stoppelman's interest. I also agree that "has guided" isn't a great choice of words, and I think you could rephrase the first part to something like, "Under Stoppleman's leadership, the company grew..." Edge3 (talk) 01:50, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

 Done

I noticed that in many places, you cite multiple sources even when only one will do. What are your reasons for citing more than one source? Personally I think that it seems excessive, but I recognize that other editors think differently. I'll take a look at the relevant policies also. Edge3 (talk) 02:58, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Yah, this is just because Kbob trimmed the article, so where there use to be say 4 sentences and 4 cites, now there is 1 sentence and 4 cites. I'll take a look and cleanup. CorporateM (Talk) 03:33, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! Just FYI, WP:INTEGRITY appears to be the most relevant guideline, but it's not very strict. Edge3 (talk) 03:40, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your contributions. I find that this article now meets the GA criteria, so I pass this nomination. Edge3 (talk) 02:47, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Storage

• Possible "further reading" item, interview in TIME: Luckerson, Victor (December 1, 2014). "Why Yelp's CEO Turned Down Google". Time Magazine. Retrieved December 4, 2014.

CorporateM (Talk) 14:50, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Possible external link

Stoppelman was recently interviewed on NPR. I think it would make a great External Link or Further Reading-type item:

• Jeremy Stoppelman interviewed on NPR

CorporateM (Talk) 03:31, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

• Agree. Done. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:07, 18 July 2015 (UTC)