Talk:List of projects supported by George Soros

Soros Universities?

I suggest adding a section on the universities that Soros has funded. Many universities in developing countries have been started on Soros money. I know of Bilgi University in Istanbul and Central European University in Budapest, but I know there are many others. I'm not suggesting a list of every university he's ever given money to, only the ones that were built substantially on his money or through the Open Society Institute. 128.54.48.14 (talk) 05:28, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Do not revert to unreliable sources

I have moved this from my talk page.Biophys (talk) 17:35, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

I must ask that you refrain from reverting contentious material sourced only to polemic right-wing Web sites which are in no way considered to be reliable sources. FCYTravis (talk) 17:06, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Any explanations why this particular source is unreliable per WP:Verifiability?Biophys (talk) 17:11, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Because it's a polemic right-wing Web site run by someone who is noted for making things up to fit his "vast left-wing conspiracy" view of the world. It's unacceptable to source anything except for DTN's opinions to DTN. Find good sources for this material, such as non-polemic newspapers, magazines, academic journals, Soros' own Web site, etc. Using DTN is like using whitehouse.org as a source for attacks on Republicans. FCYTravis (talk) 17:17, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

I do not care about Soros, Horowitz and this article. But Arbcomm has better things to do than to handle a request about you. You mean a web site of David Horowitz Freedom Center. This source was only used to establish which projects were funded by Soros; there were no conspiracy claims of any sort. If you think this source is unreliable, you or your opponent should list it at the Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard and discuss.Biophys (talk) 17:45, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Obviously, they have better things to do - notice that the request is being rejected. We cannot trust the "David Horowitz Freedom Center" to tell us truthfully what is and is not funded by George Soros. The David Horowitz Freedom Center is only a reliable source for telling us what opinions the David Horowitz Freedom Center holds. FCYTravis (talk) 17:59, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

No problem. I posted this at the Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. I personally do not see why information about projects by Soros can be considered "extremist" or "right-wing".Biophys (talk) 19:47, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of sourced edits

user:Crispingary appears to be a temporary user created to remove sourced edits for political purposes. WP is not for political purposes, it is for documentating verifiable facts. Edits can be removed if they are untrue or unverifiable, not because they advance or oppose any particular POV. NPOV = neutral (not NO) point of view requires including ALL notable positions. Redhanker (talk) 01:46, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

'The Poynter Institute'

What about 'The Poynter Institute', should that be added? As Open Society Foundations is listed in their largest funders page.

https://www.poynter.org/largest-funders-poynter-institute — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.110.29.24 (talk) 23:32, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Proposed inclusion criteria

I propose that we list only donations exceeding 10,000 British Pounds (Roughly 13,000 United States Dollars at today's exchange rate) Soros typically donates amounts in the hundreds of thousands of pounds, so this would only exclude trivial donations or useless entries where someone says Soros supported X without giving any real details.

Of course I would be open to arguments about making the criteria some other amount. --Guy Macon (talk) 05:56, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

That seems entirely reasonable, but I'm kind of confused about what the purpose of this list is. Ideally, this should be expanded beyond a naked list, so it provides context for every entry. For example, providing a minimum amount of explanation on the Immigrant Voters Win PAC would simplify NPOV issues. Otherwise this will continue to degrade into political gossip and conspiracy theory fodder.

Instead of a fixed amount, another option would be to mention how much was donated (as of a certain date) in the list. This has its own set of issues, though. Grayfell (talk) 23:06, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

That could work by indirectly ruling out any $100 USD donations (why would any reliable source bother listing such a thing?) but it could crash and burn if a reliable source ever lists 'all of Soros' donations and somebody tries to add them all to this article.

As to what the purpose of this list, I think it is meant to be a magnet for POV pushing disruptive editors so that we can easily identify and block them (Joke). We don't appear to have a list of projects supported by, say, the Koch family. The last WP:AfD was ten years ago; perhaps it is time for a new one? --Guy Macon (talk) 23:38, 22 October 2018‎ (UTC)

I also think that we should remove organizations not notable enough to have a Wikipedia article. --Guy Macon (talk) 09:42, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Unsurprisingly, it might be time to revisit this issue; the page has been vandalized several times for the purpose of Twitter screenshots lately. Is there a good reason this page exists separately from the George Soros and Open Society Foundations pages? They're already far more fleshed out than this page. LethargicParasite (talk) 17:02, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

VANDALISM ALERT

Please remove this section after remedial action is completed. I very much doubt that Soros is supporting the North American ManBoy Love Associated. Janice Vian, Ph.D. (talk) 06:51, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 June 2020

Why can’t you edit this page anymore since the riots and why is BLM and antifa removed even after been placed back?

What censure is happening??? 143.179.101.76 (talk) 18:42, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: requests for decreases to the page protection level should be directed to the protecting admin or to Wikipedia:Requests for page protection if the protecting admin is not active or has declined the request. JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:01, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

George Soros supporting Black Lives Matter source: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/aug/16/black-lives-matter-cashes-100-million-liberal-foun/ EasyBeginning (talk) 11:13, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Trying to find out which specific organizations were given money; The Washington Times source for that figure is itself, here. Can anyone confirm that this is (or contains the same information as) the tax filing referenced by The Washington Times? LethargicParasite (talk) 16:41, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Black Lives Matter has been on the list since the article's creation in October 2018, with the source being the Washington Times article. Only until now was it removed by an anonymous editor, and then the page was quickly locked by an administrator. I'm going to add it back to the list, there was no discussion whatsoever regarding the removal of this. Per WP:CONSENSUS this addition had been uncontested since the creation of the article, and as such can be considered consensus before any change is made. CatcherStorm ^talk 23:52, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

CatcherStorm, could you find it in the propublica link above? I couldn't from a cursory search, also RS states "The Washington Times is considered partisan for US politics, especially with regard to climate change and US race relations." A Google search for the two keywords results in this page, but also https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/jun/01/candace-owens/no-soros-and-foundation-do-not-pay-people-protest - I suspect a more reliable source could be useful to establish veracity. 92.20.135.243 (talk) 00:54, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

CatcherStorm, it looks like I was the one that removed it when trying to get rid of vandalism. At the time I did, it was unsourced. I still think it doesn't belong as Black Lives Matter is (1) not an organization and therefore (2) not capable of being donated to, questionable source aside. LethargicParasite (talk) 02:38, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Can you possibly source that "not an organization" claim? I mean they appear to have a website with a donation link at the bottom of the page https://blacklivesmatter.com/ and everything. That the money taking is being handled by actblue.com is not an argument for not existing. 173.153.220.187 (talk) 13:00, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Can a third party review the above arguments and make a decision on the ref's reliability (if not to then delist the item) considering that Catcher hasn't been online in three days? 92.20.135.243 (talk) 02:17, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

In no universe is the Washington times a reliable source.--Jorm (talk) 15:55, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Procedural decline - edit requests are here to implement edits which are already supported by consensus, not to make decisions as to what the edit should be. Please seek dispute resolution if needed, and also note WP:VOLUNTEER - no editor is expected or required to attend to an article on any given timetable. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 02:35, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

This was removed again today by an IP address editor. Washington Times is indeed unusable to support the claim, please see its status at WP:RSP. —PaleoNeonate – 09:25, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 July 2020

Add Black Lives Matter[3] back to list of supported organizations like it was on June 4 Foot note link is here https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/aug/16/black-lives-matter-cashes-100-million-liberal-foun/ Crucial8GB (talk) 11:19, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. See previous discussion. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 11:35, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Black Lives Matter

Black Lives Matter has been on the list since September 29th, 2018, with the following source:

References

It remained on the list unchallenged for 1 year and 8 months, until May 31st, 2020. No reason was given for its removal.
Given the protests, riots, and looting over George Floyd's death, this sudden removal is likely politically motivated.
Amaroq64 (talk) 15:24, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

No, it's more this: Someone put it there and no one noticed, and then when the protests happened someone noticed and it was deleted, because the Washington Times is not a reliable source in any universe that exists, and should never have been included in the list. --Jorm (talk) 16:07, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi Jorm. I see you removed my edit adding BLM based on a neutral Reuters article. I'm not sure if you looked at my reference but I quoted to relevant section of the article for your convenience. Here it is again "Open Society Foundations donates to groups worldwide ( here ). Some of their previous donations - including to Black Lives Matter and Planned Parenthood - have been subject to controversy in the U.S. ( here , here ). It is unclear if the foundation has donated to Black Lives Matter again in the last month." You mention that the article states the opposite. In fact, it states that Soros does not "own" black lives matters (which was one of the "facts" being checked as the premise for the article), it does say not that he does not financially support them (In fact it states the opposite as quoted above). Perhaps I am missing something so I will not revert your edit to allow you time to cite where in the article is says he has not financially supported BLM. Dpofs10 (talk) 17:21, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

No. This is undue at best and trying to steer the article towards the white supremacist narrative. --Jorm (talk) 17:31, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

This is simply a list of political projects supported by Soros, one of which happens to be in the news cycle right now and also happens to have just be deleted from the Wikipedia article recently. We have a neutral reliable source which confirms that Soros has contributed to BLM. I can see the controversy if we were talking about the level of independence of BLM from Soros (i.e. that he controls them, owns them, etc...). But I don't think anyone here is arguing for that to be included in this article or elsewhere. Dpofs10 (talk) 18:03, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

I'll just add on that I was curious what you meant by white supremacist narrative and I see that there are voices pushing the idea that Soros is behind the violence/looting etc... happening alongside the BLM protests. I don't see any evidence that supports that viewpoint. However, it is clear that Soros and his foundation have supported the BLM movement in general (just as many major corporations have) which is all that I think needs to (and should be) be added to this article. Dpofs10 (talk) 18:12, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Dpofs10 and Amaroq64: what is the relationship between the two of you? You both appear to be tag-teaming here, so much so that I got confused.--Jorm (talk) 17:33, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

I have no relationship with Amaroq64 or anyone else on Wikipedia.

Two people disagreeing with you is not a "tag team", and you can't refuse to add a well-sourced fact to the article just because you don't like the implications of said fact. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.145.104.178 (talk) 18:49, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

• Snopes 22 January 2015: Did George Soros Fund Ferguson Protests and Black Lives Matter? --Pudeo (talk) 23:59, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Despite it's title, this article doesn't actually specifically mention black lives matter, just the Ferguson protest. Similar to the Reuters article , this Snopes article discuses how there is no evidence that Soros (or connected orgs) directly funded Ferguson protests (as opposed to supporting the movement in general). Which again is a level of detail that isn't really relevant this discussion. The question is whether Soros/OSF has financially supported the BLM movement, which as the Reuters article confirms, he clearly has. Just because there exist right wing conspiracies that he is nefariously behind specific extreme actions surrounding the BLM movement (for which there is no evidence) doesn't mean that his general financial support of the movement shouldn't be included in this article. Dpofs10 (talk) 22:17, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi Jorm, I'm not a native speaker, but you removed a source declaring, that "he did not". In the article is following stated: "Some of their previous donations - including to Black Lives Matter and Planned Parenthood - have been subject to controversy in the U.S. ( here , here ). It is unclear if the foundation has donated to Black Lives Matter again in the last month." So he al least did it ones, because there is word "again". Or I understand it wrong?--2003:F4:BF03:BC68:CB2:D2D5:418A:E82C (talk) 03:40, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Open Society Foundations Press Release July 13, 2020: [1] “The success of this movement, the largest in U.S. history, will be measured over years, not weeks, and we cannot say that Black lives matter and not make a multi-year commitment to a strategy set by and centering Black leaders and organizations who changed America’s sense of what is possible,” said Tom Perriello, executive director of Open Society-U.S. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.230.159.105 (talk) 13:45, 14 July 2020 (UTC)