Talk:Taleeb Noormohamed

Roll Back Edits?

The edits I've made explain the basis of the criticisms this politician has received and as these are local considerations, they are pertinent.

NiceTryEarl (talk) 14:55, 20 February 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by NiceTryEarl (talk • contribs) 14:47, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

The main issues for me were the spacing, (no space after the period and before the reference), the use of a hyphen rather than a semicolon or em-dash, and the removal of the wikilink. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:34, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

The context implies noormohamed was somehow involved in illegal activity, which he was not. further he disclosed the number of times he used the personal exemption, so if you’re going to keep the first criticism in it’s important to ensure the article is factual to avoid libel. Canadascholar23 (talk) 05:07, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

How many "new" accounts are we going to see come to Noormohamed's aide? Continued below. Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:19, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

Nothing of the sort was implied. What was provided via multiple and credible sources was further context for criticisms of Noormohamed. Threats of libel should and could have been made by Noormohamed at the reporters and news agencies who relayed the facts at the time of their reporting.

In addition, this page and the information on it were sourced through multiple and credible news agencies and had been reviewed by editors who continue to maintain a presence on Wikipedia, which you do not. NiceTryEarl (talk) 11:01, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

The edits made are vindictive in nature and contain allegations that were proven to be incorrect. Ryanchang2010 (talk) 09:38, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

If they are sourced, the content should remain, spacing aside. Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:47, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Walter - I’m new to this, but it seems as though these comments and long diatribes are being added by someone with an ax to grind without representing the facts - i wonder why Wikipedia is allowing this Canadascholar23 (talk) 05:08, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

You are new to this, so why Noormohamed and all the political articles that have been controversial? I have no axe to grind, nor do I write long diatribes.

Please explain your relationship to the subjects per WP:COI. The sourced material is valid. I'm not sure why you are trying to censor Wikipedia. Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:19, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

I encourage other editors to examine your 'contributions' page and note how your edits dovetail remarkably with Mr Noormohameds own resume, including working alongside Bob Rae, the Vancouver Olympics of 2010, the Air India Investigation and wisecracks about 'champagne socialist' inserted into NDP leaders' Jagmeet Singh's Wikipedia page. In addition, you started a draft page on the reporter who initially broke the story of Taleeb Noormohamed's reselling of multiple homes that began with an insult about being a failed political candidate.

March 18,2022 9:59: Rohana Rezel ‎ ←Created page with 'Rohana Rezel is a failed candidate for municipal political office in Vancouver, BC.'

I believe you are Mr Taleeb Noormohamed.

And I believe you have others working to assist you in censoring information about you that is pertinent to your role as a politician. NiceTryEarl (talk) 11:11, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Here is the initial reportage from Rohana Rezel about Taleeb Noomohamed. An excerpt: "Information about properties Noormohamed flipped are not private information by any stretch of the imagination. As well, there’s a clear public interest in revealing this information."

As the reporter states, their Twitter account was locked shortly after releasing that information. This suggests someone reported it to Twitter as having violated their terms of service. I'm guessing you are hoping that by claiming previous edits to Noormohamed's page were "libelous" you will achieve the same result - a censoring of facts that are not amenable to Mr Noomohamed.

By some remarkable coincidence, that same reporter is the same individual you started to draft a Wikipedia entry for on March 18

USER: RYANCHANG2010: March 18,2022 9:59: Rohana Rezel ‎ ←Created page with 'Rohana Rezel is a failed candidate for municipal political office in Vancouver, BC.'

Civil Law is based on the balance of evidence whereas criminal law is beyond a shadow of a doubt.

In my personal opinion, the balance of evidence you have shown through you history and 'contributions' suggests you are Taleeb Noormohamed. NiceTryEarl (talk) 11:25, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

If you are suggesting that I am Noormohamed, you are sadly mistaken. You will have to show diffs here. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:29, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Walter, my comment is a reply to RyanChange2010. Do yourself a favor and check out their contributions. I think it's obvious who this person is. NiceTryEarl (talk) 19:31, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Thanks you might want to use {{reply to}} to avoid confusion. I have looked at the contribution history of many of the editors and I would classify them as WP:SPAs. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:42, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

@NiceTryEarl, there have been some problematic edits here. The article was originally full of buzzwords and promotion before it was deleted in 2019. Seems to me there was a resurgence after he was elected and the article was re-created. That said, all of Walter Görlitz's edits seem to have been in the utmost good faith as far as I can tell. I see you did not mean to refer to him. If other editors raise WP:COI or WP:SOCK concerns for you, there are processes for that. We should try to assume good faith here though.--Darryl Kerrigan (talk) 19:46, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Make no mistake - I'm appreciative of Walters contribution here. I replied under RyanChangs comment and my comment is nested under that. I am 100% convinced Walter offers positive contributions to Wikipedia

But as he's pointed out a couple of times, someone is spinning this page hard. Full disclosure: I actually live in the riding this guy was elected in. Though he won the riding, he was and remains a deeply controversial and highly criticized candidate. I didn't connect money laundering and Noormoohamed. An academic paper, an RCMP report and a provincial government working group connected rising house prices with money laundering - so I included those references as a backdrop for some of the criticism directed at him. I "fleshed out" the basis of some of the other criticism by describing how taxation works when buying and selling homes - to put in context why a reporter was asking him about this. That's why I don't feel the WP:UNDUE is warranted.

People from outside this region may not know how rising house prices are being discussed in Vancouver, including how (and to what) that rise is attributed, so I included that. People may not know how taxation on homes can be calculated or avoided, as the case may be, and so I included details on why a reporter would be asking specific questions about 'principal residency'. In every case I wanted to contextualize the criticisms levelled at Noomohamed. And I think I did pretty good. Then Noormohamed and friends showed up...

His real estate habits that were exposed during the campaign continue to be a part of the media discourse when news outlets discuss the housing issue in Vancouver and what the Liberal Party is doing about it.

If Noormohamed (who is RyanChang2010) or his friends editing this page want to holler libel as a result, let them go after the sources. He'd be laughed out of court if he was foolish enough to draw even more attention to himself.

What's bizarre (as Walter has noted) is that - for example - some random person who lives in the UK who last edited a page about a minor UK race car driver 12 years ago suddenly decides they need to urgently make corrections to Noormohamed's page - and all while a couple other new editors (who then disappear) jump in to do the same. NiceTryEarl (talk) 20:54, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Yes, I have also noticed a tendency for some edits here to appear to sanitize some criticisms and in some cases contain promotional wording and buzzwords (as I noted above). My point is that in so far as that can't be sorted out in discussion of "content" on the talk page, there are other processes. Not all issues can be addressed by focusing on content. Sometimes editors *conduct* is in issue, as with disruptive editing. The processes for dealing with accounts that may have a conflict of interest or be sockpuppets are set out in those policies. Making allegations here against editors on a talk page is not the correct process, and is unlikely to resolve the matter.--Darryl Kerrigan (talk) 21:30, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

I have been watching this this week and so far not made any edits but just chiming in to say that I do not find Canadascholar23's approach to be constructive or appropriate. Articles about living people and politicians should be fair but we should not be aggressively defending their honour from any negative coverage. Seeing this user has made past negative edits about CPC politicians that have been reverted it seems like maybe a partisan thing, which is not really appropriate for Wikipedia. We all have our biases of course but we have to keep them in check sometimes. --Dan Carkner (talk) 16:47, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 April 2022

The references to Noormohamed’s tax treatment of his real estate transactions are inaccurate and misleading. He clarified that only 3 of his properties over 10 years took advantage of the capital gains exemption, the rest were treated as business transactions and taxed at the full rate. To ignore this provides misleading information to the public. This was clarified during an on air interview with Martin MacMahon available here: https://twitter.com/martinmacmahon/status/1440207131228004359?s=21&t=uMn8GfNdUZmD0pVnaTm9EA

In addition, the references to money laundering are a non sequitur and seek to cast inaccurate aspersions towards Noormohamed.

Finally the statement “The practice of flipping was countered by his own party leader Justin Trudeau, who promised to introduce an anti-flipping tax during a campaign stop.[21]” reads as editorial opinion and misleads the reader to assuming the leader’s statement was directed to Noormohamed when in fact it was not. Noormohamed himself campaigned in support of such a tax.

In an environment where misleading details or misinformation can cause irreparable harm, our wiki community has an obligation to do better. 2607:FEA8:760:3400:D561:159A:EB84:8162 (talk) 18:15, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

The sources are clear. I have changed the section heading and adding the source. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:24, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

Once again - another Noormohamed fan pops up. The statement made in the provided news source was that Noormohamed did not answer the question directly "I followed all laws..." and this was explicitly stated in the source. There is no need for your equivocating. Additionally, Noormohamed's buying and selling took place over more than a decade, (since 2005) so a decade did not cover the entirety of his buying and selling sprees.

Helpful hint: When a statement is followed by a thing that looks like this [], it means the number inside those is the reference to the quote. Mr Trudeau made that statement. This is inarguable. Your opinion of who or what it is directed at is the opinion and to be honest, unnecessary.

Finally, "our" wiki community - that being Mr Noormohameds page - seems to conjure an impressive number of 'just dropping by to do some edits or express an opinion favourable to Mr Noormohamed' types. Perhaps you will consider dropping your other account (RyanChang2010) and signing up for a new one. NiceTryEarl (talk) 11:41, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

WP:UNDUE flipping

I tend to think the details of these "flipping" criticisms are relevant and appropriate to include. The numbers of homes and the fact that he refused to say whether he had claimed "principle residence" status to avoid taxes was a significant issue in that campaign. It is a lot of text about that one issue, but the correct way to deal with those WP:UNDUE concerns, is likely to add more content about his prior campaigns, this campaign and his time in office. A few sentences giving this important detail will not seem undue if the rest of the article is expanded appropriately. Hiding the real nature of the "flipping criticisms" behind those words alone, leaves a reader with the impression these might have been one or two homes that he lived in briefly, not 42 properties including 30 he held for less than 2 years. He reportedly made $4,900,000 on this activity.[1] Anyway, I think all of those details are appropriate to include. I suggest other information be added to ensure it is not the focus of the article though.--Darryl Kerrigan (talk) 22:38, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

@WildComet: You were the one to initially remove due to UNDUE. Any elaboration? Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:54, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Sure. While I agree that the flipping criticisms are notable enough to include in the article, given a large part of the political campaign being centred around housing, I don't believe that level of detail is necessary since it was still such a small part of the campaign. In 1, 2 or 5 years, the amount of money he made or the number of houses he owned will be less relevant, but the fact that he was doing it contrary to his party platform will still be just as notable as it is today. —WildComet ^talk 03:22, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for responding. I assumed it was something like that. My understanding when I saw UNDUE was it not such a major element of the campaign, and if we were to expand the rest of the article, that would make the article unduly large. Compare this article to other first-term backbenchers in the current government. Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:37, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

I have to strongly disagree with the argument that housing and the causes of rising house prices and rents was not a major element of the campaign. My reasons for including the criticisms to such depth was that while the 'frothy market' and the activity of house flipping is not illegal, there were a chorus of voices from academia, police enforcement and even governmental agencies that suggested other factors were contributing to rising prices rise including, but not limited to illegal activities such as money laundering. I included credible and related sources that elaborated in that relationship and I explicitly did not state - nor did the sources suggest - that Noormohamed was knowingly involved in illegal activity.

As another commentator has said, cheating on your wife is not illegal either, but the fact it's not meant to be disclosed or there is shame associated with it probably means there's an ethical component. NiceTryEarl (talk) 11:56, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. I tried to be thorough and explain the background of the some of the criticisms of Noormohamed received. That's why I included government reports, police reports and academic articles examining other factors behind rising house prices. The claim of libel these 'new' editors are making is ridiculous.

What's mysterious to me is that the section that noted how he avoided an all candidates debate and failed to show for a CBC radio forum are now gone too. He faced criticisms over those decisions too, but I notice none of his newly found 'favourable editors' have much to say over why that's been deleted. The guy was ghosting his constituents during an election - that tends to be something people are, you know, 'critical' of. NiceTryEarl (talk) 12:08, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Sorry.. one more detail on the WP:UNDUE.

I agree that adding more context is the way to go and this explains why I outlined the source of the criticism (creating 'froth',money laundering, etc) via RCMP reports, academic articles and government reports. In the initial reporting, Noormohmaed was not forthright on the scale of his buying and selling, which at that time was only known to be four homes.

But Noormohamed pushes back on the suggestion he's a speculator.

In a phone interview, he told us he intended to live at the property on West 13th, but the pandemic made renovations impossible. He says rules in the building meant he couldn’t rent the property out, so he sold it.

As for the home on National Avenue, Noormohamed says the intention was for his sister to move into that property, but as a result of the pandemic, she decided to continue living with their parents, so again, there was a decision for a quick sale.

Regarding the Burrard sale, Noormohamed suggested he, along with his parents, turned it into a livable space.

“Understand my family,” Noormohamed said. “My father is an architect, my mother is an interior designer. And they have a passion for retrofitting and redesigning and working through old spaces. And so the Burrard property was an unlivable, at that time, unlivable property. There were quite literally pigeons in the apartment, needles.”

Of the four deals, the 2017 sale in the West End was seemingly the most profitable, bringing in a profit of around $200,000 within half a year.

Note that Noormohamed spoke with the reporter and explained away each purchase as being somehow unsuitable... he had an opportunity to 'come clean' at this point - he chose not to.

It was not until a day or so later that the full scale of his purchasing (40+ homes) was known.

This explains how context plays out over time. It's why I included the reported story about him not directly answering questions about whether he'd claimed those homes as his principal residence and was thus untaxed income. I had to explain how tax laws worked in Canada and how this factored into criticisms about his lack of disclosure. I did that. And sourced it. Accurately.

If Noormohamed made some statement that was relayed on Twitter the night of the election that clarified how often he'd claimed a principal residence, the complaint above about 'refuted' should have included that as an update, not required the complete deletion of the entire body of text.

Being only a little more forthcoming the night he was elected does not negate the facts as they were known - and reported - at the time. NiceTryEarl (talk) 12:47, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Breaker News source

The Breaker News is a small local (British Columbia) news site operated and edited by journalist Bob Mackin.

Bob Mackin, the editor of the Breaker News, formerly worked for The Georgia Straight, whose current editor called him (in 2020), "... hardnosed Vancouver journalist Bob Mackin"

Here is a selection of some of the stories Mackin wrote for the Straight.

According to Linksearch, The Georgia Straight URL can be found in over 500 articles in Wikipedia. To repeat, the current editor of the Georgia Straight - a quality, credible source as far as Wikipedia is concerned - calls the person who runs the Breaker News a journalist.

Harbour Publishing, who has published Mackin's book,"Goals and Dreams, A Celebration of Canadian Women's Soccer" states this... Award-winning North Vancouver journalist Bob Mackin's Olympic journey began in the fall of 1998 when he attended the news conference at BC Place Stadium announcing Vancouver's bid to become Canada's candidate for the 2010 Winter Olympics. Almost twelve years later, he was among the last people to leave the stadium after the Games closed. He even donned a pair of red mittens to carry the Olympic torch in Edmonton. Bob spent ten years as a sports columnist with the Vancouver Courier and reported for six years for 24 Hours Vancouver and the Sun Media chain. He is the author of three books on baseball trivia and one on soccer.

While the Breaker News is small and relatively unknown, this should not and does not disqualify it as a reputable and credible news outlet.

At least one other page in Wikipedia has used the Breaker News as a supporting source. That page is the John Furlong page and the associated link has been up since at least 2017. If that link is permissible and the linked content credible in the eyes of other Wikipedia editors, there is no reason why links to The Breaker News should called "Questionable" and removed from this page on those grounds. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NiceTryEarl (talk • contribs) 12:42, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Does not meet the standard of WP:RS. Specifically, the source is self-published. Therefore, it does not meet the standards we have set here for a reliable source; specifically, as self-published, it lacks editorial oversight. It doesn't matter who the writer is, nor what their credentials are - it is essentially their personal site which, for purposes of an encyclopedia, does not meet the standard, and most certainly does not meet standards for a BLP, which require an even higher standard that general articles. I would recommend reviewing and understanding the entire section of "Reliable sources" in the BLP guidelines: WP:BLPSOURCES. ButlerBlog (talk) 12:51, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps you should drop a quick note to the editors of the Furlong page and explain how the Wikipedia works to them as well, before you delete that link. NiceTryEarl (talk) 13:50, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

No need. I removed it. ButlerBlog (talk) 14:23, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Lead cite

I returned some information that was previously removed from the lead as uncited. However, the information is included (and cited) in the article. Per WP:LEADCITE, this could go either way - either citing it in the lead or the body. It's open to consensus for the editors involved, but you do need to pick a direction and be consistent. It's not necessary to cite it both lead and body as that is WP:OVERCITE. So if you're going to cite one item in the lead, then all items need to be cited in the lead. Otherwise, if it's to be cited in the article, then just be consistent for all items.

(Side note regarding the source - it's a press release, so it's not a great source since these are generally considered to be WP:SELFSOURCE. However, it's not contentious either so I left the source and tagged it as needing something better should someone locate one.) ButlerBlog (talk) 17:16, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

CityNews Audio transcript.

Having reviewed the CityNews audio, I can say this. It's terrible quality. It's terrible and portions are barely audible because it takes place at the campaign headquarters of the candidate on the night of the election, when the results are still in question.

One thing the editor who insisted that this interview was the source of all answers to all questions Noormohamed faced during the campaign did not mention was that the reporter was initially refused entry to the campaign headquarters on the eve of the election.

Knowing that, I leave it to the reader to decide how earnest and forthright the candidate was willing to be with the press during this campaign. (Should we include that in the campaign section?) In any case, the reporter eventually got in.

On the question of whether he would continue the practice of buying and selling homes if elected, he says "No". On the remaining question about primary residences, Noromohamed says "Martin, I'm not going to get into my housing investm... or uhhh... any other investments tonight... and once we have results, we uhh... other discussions can be had." Citynews: "So on the primary residences you're not willing to talk about that specific angle tonight..." Noormohmaed: "The only thing that I will say to you is that I have only declared a primary residence when it has been a primary residence. Period." CityNews: "But how many homes are we talking about?" Noormohamed: "You know...(long pause)... again, I've said to you I have declared those residences, are primary residences, which are my primary residences and... I have moved 3 times in the last decade." (Crosstalk) CityNews: "So is that 3 homes in the last de.." Noomohamed: "3 times in the last decade." CityNews: "Is that 3 homes then, that you..." Noormohamed: "3 times in the last decade" CityNews: "Right." Noormohamed: "Okay?" CityNews: "Alright, anything you'd like to add..." Noormohmaed: "Nope."

I'm willing to say he answered the 'will you still be flipping homes?" question. But the question about primary residences was less about answering that question, than in answering affirmatively to a statement that did not answer the question, and that the reporter repeated back to him.

It's reasonable to say that Noormohamed does not directly answer the question about how many times he declared primary residences while flipping homes. He affirms a phrase about how many times he's moved that is repeated back to him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NiceTryEarl (talk • contribs) 16:44, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

Post Election "Early Edition" Interview

Here is a radio interview Noromohamed did after the election.

Noormohamed’s controversial candidacy and his approach to the media and public events during his campaign might best be understood in the questions asked of him by guest host (Angela Sterritt) of CBC’s Early Edition, shortly after the race was decided. Noormohamed’s failure to make any public appearances or joint appearances with other candidates after the story of his real estate speculation broke did not go unnoticed or unremarked upon... as this reporter duly notes.

Sterritt: “During the campaign you received national attention for making millions of dollars flipping houses, at least 21 of them you owned for less than a year, which is a practice your party has promised to ban. What does house flipping do to housing affordability in the region?”

Sterritt: “But I mean, how seriously should your constituents take you seriously on housing affordability, given your history in the real estate market?”

Sterrit: “Is it easy though, to change positions on this when you’ve made millions of dollars in this market?”

Sterritt: “Just going back to the original question though.. how can you truthfully represent the party policy when you’ve benefited in the millions of dollars from a practice that your party says is hurting housing affordability?”

Sterritt: “What conversations did you have with the party about your housing policy after that story broke?”

Sterritt: “Just one last question. Before the election you had been booked on this show as part of an all candidates panel for Vancouver Granville... two days before it aired you dropped out, citing a different event you had scheduled, the same week you were scheduled to take part in a candidates event moderated by CBC reporter Justin McElroy and you also dropped out of that .... After the story broke about you flipping houses... was that part of your strategy, to keep a low profile during the rest of the campaign?” NiceTryEarl (talk) 04:40, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

Source issues, timeline problems, job titles.

The job titles claimed in this bio are not supported by the records I've accessed and some timelines seem amiss as well.

For example, "He proceeded to serve as a vice president (strategy and partnerships) for the 2010 Winter Olympics which were held in Vancouver. Following the Olympics, Noormohamed was appointed by the Government of British Columbia to conduct a review of the province’s service delivery model.The review found substantial areas of improvement and much of the report was subsequently redacted by the provincial government."

The 'readacted' presentation Noormohamed provided to the provincial government has a date on its cover. That date is December 10, 2010. This is two months before the Winter Olympics had started. So the timeline stated here ("following the Olympics") does not make any sense. He seems to have been simultaneously employed in differing capacities by both the provincial government and, as might be expected, VANOC before the 2010 Winter Olympics had formally begun. http://docs.openinfo.gov.bc.ca/D15989813A_Response_Package_CTZ-2012-00104.PDF[bare URL PDF]

Second, the source url used for this statement "He proceeded to serve as a vice president (strategy and partnerships) for the 2010 Winter Olympics which were held in Vancouver." does not meet the standard of WP:RS. The source is a blog that's hasn't been updated in years. And whatever links under the article that claim Noormohamed had that job title are no longer active. Quite literally, the source for his job title is a headline of an old blog. According to an archived Federal website here that list the participants in VANOC 2010, Noormohamed's job title was "Director, Partnerships". Though there is a Business in Vancouver article here that also states his title was "Vice President of Strategy and Partnerships" there is no way of knowing whether Noormohamed proffered this title to the article's writer. Whatever the case, according to the Federal government of Canada, his job title does not include any mention of "corporate" or "Vice President". NiceTryEarl (talk) NiceTryEarl (talk) 10:17, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

pro-Noormohamed edits

I note another round of edits rececently by @Canadascholar23 who has been asked in the past if they have any relationship to Mr. Noormohamed and, as far as I can tell, has never publicly responded about that. Not that the recent edits are particularly problematic, but nonetheless the goal here should not be to spin the article to be more positive about him. Dan Carkner (talk) 14:59, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

Homagetocatalonia - Self proclaimed supporter of the Liberal Party, but editing Liberal Party politician's pages?

As this editors own page shows, they are a supporter of the the Liberal Party of Canada and the Liberal Party of Ontario. It strikes me as deeply problematic and highly unethical for an editor to add or remove any content from the pages of a politician representing that party.

I would strongly encourage Homagetocatalonia to recuse themselves from editing this page on behalf of Mr Noormohamed or any other member of the Liberal Party. NiceTryEarl (talk) 00:12, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

With respect, the circumstances involved do not appear to reflect any breach of the relevant policy on conflicts of interest. Can you direct me to such policies? If you are saying those with partisan views cannot edit Wikipedia on politics, that would eliminate most of the editors who engage with the subject matter .

I also note that you have reverted my edits without supporting information or sourcing showing that those sources are wrong. As a result of your edits, there appears to be nothing in this article that discusses the subject's family background. Please suggest language to correct this deficiency. Homagetocatalonia (talk) 14:24, 31 August 2023 (UTC)