Talk:Zachary Karabell

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles

Economics Low‑importance

	Business and economics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

University of Oxford Low‑importance

	University of Oxford portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of Oxford, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the University of Oxford on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.University of OxfordWikipedia:WikiProject University of OxfordTemplate:WikiProject University of OxfordUniversity of Oxford articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was nominated for deletion on 17 September 2008 (UTC). The result of the discussion was no consensus.

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 18 January 2022 and 10 May 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Sageicedlatte (article contribs).

he would tell you himself that he is a communist

not a single conservative would believe a single thing this guy says - where in his article does it say that he is a communist? - otherwise this is just a fluff piece for self promotion

where is the neutral viewpoint that is critical to everything this article attempts as propaganda to promote? --70.162.171.210 (talk) 17:02, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

According to this communist fanboy, the communism of China makes them more productive than the capitalist US - please tell that to the millions killed by Mao Mr. Karabell! The answer to the title of the following article by Mr. Karabell, Why is China's stimulus working so much better than ours?, is because they have millions murdered to get there--70.162.171.210 (talk) 17:26, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

whomever wrote up his article it says he has a phd from harvard and yet it does not say in what area of study --- my question is is it in underwater basket weaving or the history of communism?--68.231.15.56 (talk) 18:33, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

i notice he is giving stock picks on cnbc --- so he has a degree in finance or economics? --- i bet not--68.231.15.56 (talk) 18:34, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I came to this article to find out about his economics credentials after reading an article in which he misstated Say's Law and showed that he clearly has no understanding of basic economics principles like supply and demand. Would really appreciate it if someone could source those. 130.15.87.48 (talk) 03:14, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Too much puff

I just made a substantial pass over the lead to reign in the puff and dewallify the prose. Many inline exlinks removed. We really don't need to know his every role at the non-notable Fred Alger, or every auspicious newspaper who has ever published one of his commentaries.

I feel the lead is still on the generous side, and that perhaps much about his books would better belong in a books subsection. — MaxEnt 16:17, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that this article reads as if it was written for promotional purposes.

Organization and rewording

After looking over this page and comparing it to other biographies of living persons pages, I found that this is worded very incorrectly and is seeming like it's purely a page for promotional purposes like user MaxEnt above me has already said. I'm planning on reorganizing this page over the next few weeks to make it look more like a biographical page should be. These edits will mainly take place in a sandbox that I will link down below. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sageicedlatte (talk • contribs) 23:28, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the link for the sandbox I previously mentioned:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Sageicedlatte/sandbox Sageicedlatte (talk) 00:46, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I will be using Elizabeth II and WP:BLP for the organization portion of the editing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sageicedlatte (talk • contribs) 00:57, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I realized that I should base my example article on an article about a living author instead of Queen Elizabeth II, so I will instead be using Stephen King for my editing.Sageicedlatte (talk) 01:06, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The lead has way too much information that should be distributed throughout the article instead of being in the lead. If this article is to look more like the biography of another living author like Stephen King, the section organizations should look like:

Life
Education (if anyone can find notable things about his education)
Career
Current Works
Publications
Notes
References
Bibliography
External Links — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sageicedlatte (talk • contribs) 01:50, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Removing external link

I think that the link below should be deleted because it just leads directly to a website whose URL is the person's name. This could be more evidence that the article may have been written with promotional intentions:

River Twice Research — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sageicedlatte (talk • contribs) 02:56, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]