Talk:Pierre Omidyar/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

'His name "Pierre" is a French form of the name Peter'

Relevant? Not. Recommend this line be removed from the article.Toddsschneider (talk) 18:37, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Absolutely! (I mean, yes, I mean, no, not relevant.) However, I'm doing more controversial editing and the Imperial sycophants who now dominate en.Wikipedia will probably reverse whatever I do. Hopefully you or someone does it as an isolated edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.168.237.156 (talk) 12:54, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Wealth

I'm removing this: "He is the second richest person of Iranian descent, following Pallonji Mistry at $9.7 Billion (96 on Forbes List) who is a Parsi Zoroastrian.[9]"

Omidyar is of Iranian heritage. Mistry is Indian, born in India: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pallonji_Mistry Thus this statement is factually false. The author of this statement needs to verify who, of Iranian hertiage, if anyone, is wealthier than Omidyar, or state Omidyar is the wealthiest person of Iranian heritage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hardwarefreak (talk • contribs) 03:13, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Parsi means Persian, more specifically a term for Indians of Persian descent. Zoroastrianism is the Persian religion of 'classical' times. Iranian means, in its narrow meaning, Persian. In a wider meaning, it could happily replace the acceptable 'Indo-European' or the unacceptable (due to the frowned-upon Nazi episode previous to the 1000-year empire project acquiring new masters) 'Aryan'.

I would love to know specifically how the excised passage is factually false.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.168.237.156 (talk) 12:48, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

That edit (two paragraphs ending 'how the excised passage is factually false.') was mine--I forgot to sign it. I have now also removed some additional comments of mine that were off-topic but more importantly, they could have been misunderstood to be making outrageous allegations against Omidyar and/or Mistry. In fact I had drifted completely off-topic and was merely speculating about why anyone would make an issue of denying someone's Iranian heritage.--Alkhowarizmi (talk) 04:33, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

New news site announced

NY Times interview and I'm sure other WP:RS talk about his collaboration with Glen Greenwald to create " a large, general-interest news site with a focus on investigative and government accountability reporting. " If someone wants to do work of putting in info. Meanwhile it's here anyway. User:Carolmooredc 02:50, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Did you intend to say something? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.168.237.156 (talk) 12:58, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

raw material

http://pando.com/2014/02/28/pierre-omidyar-co-funded-ukraine-revolution-groups-with-us-government-documents-show/ "Pierre Omidyar co-funded Ukraine revolution groups with US government, documents show" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.17.137.168 (talk) 20:33, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Nationalities

He is not American. He has 2 nationalities: American, and French. And Iranian by the ethnicity. He was born in Paris, with a Iranian name, Parviz and changed to a French Christian name, Pierre, and an Iranian family name, from an Iranian family, and moved to the USA at a young age, because of his father's job, who was working for a French university was transferred, and he added the American nationality. He kept the French one, so it's still a French. He is listed among the biggest France fortunes by challenge, that is a reputable newspaper, and by other French newspapers https://www.challenges.fr/classements/fortune/pierre-omidyar_2493

Sources state his citizenship is American. See https://www.forbes.com/profile/pierre-omidyar/#8549b7566da8 for example. All of what you write above is already covered in Pierre Omidyar #Early life, so I suppose you're trying to get his description in the opening sentence changed for the usual reasons of spin. Our guidance, MOS:CONTEXTBIO, states

The opening paragraph should usually provide context for the activities that made the person notable. In most modern-day cases this will be the country of which the person is a citizen, national or permanent resident, or if the person is notable mainly for past events, the country where the person was a citizen, national or permanent resident when the person became notable. Ethnicity, religion, or sexuality should generally not be in the lead unless it is relevant to the subject's notability. Similarly, previous nationalities or the place of birth should not be mentioned in the lead unless they are relevant to the subject's notability.

Is that clear enough for you? --RexxS (talk) 14:32, 9 September 2019 (UTC)