Talk:Gene Freidman

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gene Freidman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151208094457/http://www.genefreidman.com/ to http://www.genefreidman.com

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:32, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

BLPCRIME

He is a relatively unknown person and BLPRCIME makes clear that editors should consider anything that is not a conviction from a biography. WP:ONUS puts the burden on the editor restoring the material to gain consensus for reinserting it. Since Freidman is a private individual who seems to have gotten most of the coverage in his life for this crime that is not praticularly notable or outstanding per WP:CRIME, it should be removed, and I ask that it be removed until we get a consensus on what should be included. TonyBallioni (talk) 22:48, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Again, he is not a relatively unknown individual. Google him. Or just look at the references in the article. The specific information that you removed was widely reported. It was announced by the Attorney General of New York State. Unfortunately for Freidman, it is the continuation of a long series of legal disputes with the government and others. It is not inaccurate or inflammatory and will likely lead to further reporting as the case gets resolved. There is no question that Freidman is innocent until proven guilty and the article does not suggest otherwise. I do not understand why this one piece has been singled out for removal. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 23:02, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Because there was very little press coverage until the 2015 lawsuit, which is not grounds for notability. Coverage of unproven crimes certainly don't contribute to notability otherwise, especially when it is someone hwo is low-profile. The vast majority of readers to the English Wikipedia will have no idea who this person is. He's not a household name, even in NYC before this happened. He gets the benefit we extend to all other living people, which is considering not including criminal charges until a conviction is secured, regardless of who is levying the charges. I firmly believe in ONUS for BLPs, and if other users disagree with me, I'll defer to them, but I am going to challenge something that the BLP policy frowns upon. TonyBallioni (talk) 23:12, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

It doesn't matter when the press coverage starts or why if there's sufficient to satisfy WP:NOTABILITY. And there is. Probably this 2008 piece and this 2015 piece will do it. They were name-dropping him in the New York Times in 2007. Freidman easily meets the notability guidelines because of his status in the taxi industry. The legal issues are relevant, but not why he is notable. Well reported details about a high-profile case (because of Freidman's status in the taxi industry) should not be an issue. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 23:35, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

A one-line quote in a NYT opinion piece is not coverage under WP:N. When coverage start actually does matter for things such as crimes: if they are shown to be historically significant we cover them. This means continuing coverage beyond just trial updates. That doesn't exist here for the criminal part. Coverage of a failing business is more coverage of Uber than anything else, and the 40 under 40 is clearly not anything that we would accept in an AfD as sourcing. Additionally, even if he were notable it would not necessarily make him high profile, which is what the BLPCRIME issue is. TonyBallioni (talk) 23:42, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

My New York Times example was just that - an example of how Freidman was well known prior to 2015 for his involvement in the taxi business. The 40 under 40 in Crain's New York is "not anything that we would accept in an AfD as sourcing"? Of course it is. WP:BLPCRIME does not say or imply that the person needs to be "high profile". The term used is "relatively unknown", which does not apply to Freidman, despite your contentions. Let's agree to disagree and let other editors express an opinion. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 23:54, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

• Since this has come up at the AfD again, I'll bring it here: Power~enwiki removed a domestic dispute with his wife, and I removed unproven charges of him, a private individual. The domestic dispute is petty and he did not plead guilty to the actual charge of abuse. No conviction has been secured regarding the recent charges, and as a private individual, under BLPCRIME they should not be in there. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:46, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
  • I disagree for reasons already stated, but let's wait and see if the article survives the deletion discussion. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 02:55, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
    • Re: your edit summary and what you stated at the AfD: this is about one of our most important policies and what every admin who has commented on the AfD has agreed on: this article is a BLP violation. The close is headed to no consensus because of the distraction of the paid editing vs. GNG issue, but the protection of Mr. Freidman under our BLP policy is my number one concern with this article. He is a private person and is entitled to protections by BLP policy. The most eggregious BLP violations have been removed for now, if it survives AfD we can deal with bringing the rest of it in line with BLP then. TonyBallioni (talk) 03:00, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Now that the AFD has closed, it is tiem to revisit these issues. I started a discussion at the BLP noticeboard to get more input. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 18:58, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Americocentric terminology

Please understand that en.Wki is actually read by more English speaking users outside the USA. A better term than medallion should be used. Nobody outside the US knows what this means. Or, of course, create an article about taxi medallions and link to it. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:04, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

A good point. I've clarfied by linking to Taxicabs_of_the_United_States#Medallions. One of the sources used there has four paragraphs about Freidman, who they call a "taxi mogul". World's Lamest Critic (talk) 04:14, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gene Freidman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151208125833/http://jpupdates.com/2015/01/25/city-hall/ to http://jpupdates.com/2015/01/25/city-hall/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:10, 12 October 2017 (UTC)