Talk:Ben Delo
Biography Start‑class | |||||||
|
Effective Altruism C‑class Low‑importance | ||||||||||
|
Non-neutral editing
In recent weeks, two different IP accounts have removed good faith edits to this article in what appears to be an attempt to remove content that may appear negative and add positive content. I appeal to the editor or editors to create a Wikipedia account where it will be easier to reach a consensus for the content of this article. I also appeal for that editor or editors to read the policy on biographical articles at WP:BLP Seaweed (talk) 19:23, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
COI requests March 2023
It is requested that an edit be made to the semi-protected article at A. (edit · history · last · links · protection log)
This template must be followed by a complete and specific description of the request, that is, specify what text should be removed and a verbatim copy of the text that should replace it. "Please change X" is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form "please change X to Y".
The edit may be made by any autoconfirmed user. Remember to change the |
Could these changes be considered? Thank you! Forrestal962 (talk) 22:20, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- Note: need to adjust requests for accuracy, temporarily removing. Sorry for any confusion. Forrestal962 (talk) 01:38, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
- Just added back, it should be more clear now. Forrestal962 (talk) 22:42, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
- Note: need to adjust requests for accuracy, temporarily removing. Sorry for any confusion. Forrestal962 (talk) 01:38, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
Request 1 - The Times
Could this detail ("In 2018 [[The Times]] in incorrectly reported that Delo had been included in the [[Sunday Times Rich List]] for that year following ruling by [[Independent Press Standards Organisation]].") be altered? It currently seems to be an un-encyclopedic synthesis of two unrelated sources (Times in 2018 & 2020 IPSO complaint), and also without context.
For context, could this detail be added to the front of the sentence, to clarify his billionaire status in 2018 wasn't incorrectly reported, only his inclusion in the list?
- In 2018, ''The Times'' reported that Delo was the United Kingdom's youngest self-made billionaire.</ref>https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/wheres-wallet-can-you-spot-ben-delo-the-uks-first-bitcoin-billionaire-llp2fk2rt</ref>
About the rest, I would like to request the retraction detail be removed entirely (for being a bit silly and trivial I think, and also for being sourced from a government complaint entry instead of a newspaper article). It also appears to be in error as is, since the IPSO complaint details the 2020 article "Bitcoin tycoon’s £5m gift gives Oxford the jitters" as the one with the redaction, not the 2018 article actually linked and referenced right now. Also, the IPSO article notes that the 2020 redaction was done preemptively by The Times before the IPSO complaint was filed in 2020 for other reasons.
But if the responder feels the info should stay, have it at least rewritten for clarity and accuracy?
- In 2018, ''The Times'' reported that Delo was the United Kingdom's youngest self-made billionaire.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/wheres-wallet-can-you-spot-ben-delo-the-uks-first-bitcoin-billionaire-llp2fk2rt |title= Where's Wallet? Can you spot Ben Delo, the UK's first bitcoin billionaire? |date= 1 July 2018 |work= [[The Times]] |last=Urwin |first=Rosamund}}</ref> As noted in a 2020 [[Independent Press Standards Organisation|IPSO]] complaint, ''The Times'' removed a reference that he had been included in the 2018 [[Sunday Times Rich List]].<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.ipso.co.uk/rulings-and-resolution-statements/ruling/?id=29243-20 |title=Resolution Statement – 29243-20 Delo v The Times |publisher=Independent Press Standards Organisation |date=29 March 2021 |accessdate=17 December 2022}}</ref>
Request 2 - Descriptors
- Could "philanthropist" be added to the infobox's "occupation" row to better reflect the page?
- Also, could "philanthropist" be added to the descriptors in the page's first sentence?
- Could "mathematician" also be added to the lead sentence (it's already in the infobox)? Concerning whether to use "former," note that he has fairly recently published work in mathematics (source).
Request 3 - Mersenne Prime
I'm sorry there aren't many newspaper sources, but could it be mentioned he's associated with the GIMPS project? Maybe this could be added?
- Delo is associated with Mersenne.org and the [[Great Internet Mersenne Prime Search]], a collaborative internet project to find [[Mersenne prime]] numbers.<ref>https://www.mersenne.org/report_top_500_custom/?type=2000&start_date=2000-01-06</ref>
- Thank you! Forrestal962 (talk) 22:42, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
- Done PK650 (talk) 00:53, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
April 2023 requests
It is requested that an edit be made to the semi-protected article at A. (edit · history · last · links · protection log)
This template must be followed by a complete and specific description of the request, that is, specify what text should be removed and a verbatim copy of the text that should replace it. "Please change X" is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form "please change X to Y".
The edit may be made by any autoconfirmed user. Remember to change the |
Could these requests be considered? Forrestal962 (talk) 18:13, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
Plurality of violations
In the lead paragraph, can "pled guilty to United States Bank Secrecy Act violations" be modified to "pled guilty to a single United States Bank Secrecy Act violation"? As to the reason why, the Justice Department doc used as reference lower on the page states that "Hayes... and Delo... pled guilty to one count each of violating the Bank Secrecy Act." The CFTC doc also linked on the page describes it as a single count as well, making the plural violations inaccurate.
With the same rationale, could the wording be changed in the lower part of the page from "Delo and his BitMEX cofounder had pled guilty to Bank Secrecy Act violations" to "Delo and his BitMEX cofounder had pled guilty to one Bank Secrecy Act violation each"?
Inaccurate sentence in lead
In the lead paragraph, can "and a $10m fine." be removed? To explain, the civil monetary penalty was unrelated to the Bank Secrecy Act violation, occurring as part of a separate civil case a month earlier (see the Bank Secrecy Act violations section). Being even a little inaccurate like it is and a sensitive detail, it would be preferable to have it promptly removed per WP:BLPREMOVE and also maybe per WP:BALANCE (in the latter case, as a temporary means of balancing the page, since so much of both the lead and page body right now are so focused on the legal matters at the moment, comparative to general career stuff or inventions/cultural impact).
- Done With a few minor copyedits — SamX [talk · contribs · he/him] 04:34, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you very much ^_^ Forrestal962 (talk) 14:32, 5 May 2023 (UTC)