Talk:Peter Schiff: Difference between revisions
Line 73: | Line 73: | ||
::::::The page has his opinions on the gold standard and other issues. Somewhat might want to know his opinions on the case but be too lazy to click on the link. |
::::::The page has his opinions on the gold standard and other issues. Somewhat might want to know his opinions on the case but be too lazy to click on the link. |
||
::::::“According to Peter Schiff ‘There was no way those allegations were true, but once those stories broke, the bank's business imploded.’” [[User:Markj573|Markj573]] ([[User talk:Markj573|talk]]) 18:22, 22 December 2023 (UTC) |
::::::“According to Peter Schiff ‘There was no way those allegations were true, but once those stories broke, the bank's business imploded.’” [[User:Markj573|Markj573]] ([[User talk:Markj573|talk]]) 18:22, 22 December 2023 (UTC) |
||
:::::For the purpose of gaining consensus on the edits, I'm okay with adding the Peter Schiff quote. Thus the proposed Investigation section would go as follows: |
|||
:::::On June 30, 2022, the Puerto Rico Office of the Commissioner of Financial Institutions (OCIF) announced they had suspended the operations of Puerto Rico-based Euro Pacific International Bank, which officials said was under suspicion of facilitating money laundering and offshore tax evasion. The OCIF ordered Euro Pacific Bank to be shut down due to insufficient capitol and committed the bank to maintaining cash reserves sufficient to cover all deposits, outstanding debts to creditors, and other operating expenses. Schiff claimed this was due to the allegations by 60 Minutes Australia, The Age newspaper, and the subsequent investigations, saying, "There was no way those allegations were true, but once those stories broke, the bank's business imploded." Operation Atlantis yielded no charges of money laundering or any other illegal activity. In 2022 Schiff filed civil action against the Nine Network and The Age newspaper for defamation over the Australian 60 Minutes interview and subsequent Age articles. On November 21 the civil action was settled. As part of the settlement, Schiff was paid $550,000 by Nine Networks and The Age, and all versions of the broadcast were permanently removed by the respondents. [[User:Mkstokes|Mkstokes]] ([[User talk:Mkstokes|talk]]) 19:15, 22 December 2023 (UTC) |
Revision as of 19:15, 22 December 2023
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Peter Schiff article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 90 days |
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
The article Peter Schiff, along with other articles relating to Austrian economics, is currently subject to active community sanctions. The current restrictions, which were implemented by consensus#Ludwig_von_Mises_Institute Old revision of Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive816#Ludwig von Mises Institute, are:
|
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. |
This article is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
The following Wikipedia contributor may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.
|
President Donald Trump
I am only recently looking into Peter Schiff, however I found that he tweeted that in 2016, he voted for Donald Trump. "I hoped he would be a statsemen, Instead he's a politician". https://twitter.com/PeterSchiff/status/1146855912793149440
I think that somewhere in this article these views should be reflected. As someone researching him, this was one of the things I would want to know. I'm sure there is more online about his views but here is a starting point. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WBPchur (talk • contribs)
- Apologies, forgot to sign initially. WBPchur 💬●✒️●💛 21:52, 19 July 2020 (UTC).
- WBPchur, where in the article do you think this should be mentioned? Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 21:55, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
- Emir of Wikipedia, probably in 'Political Career' somewhere. Possibly in 'Other Endorsements'. It isn't an endorsement though, an opinion. Where would you suggest? WBPchur 💬●✒️●💛 22:11, 19 July 2020 (UTC).
- WBPchur, I think if it is just that one tweet it should be left out. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 15:08, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
- Sure, for now. I am confident that there will be more than one comment on it on the internet - he runs show on his YouTube channel and regularly talks about Trump by the look of the titles. I myself don't have the time to sift through these, however my hope is someone will (or already has), and knows where to look. So, to any future readers, this would be a brilliant idea. For now let's just leave it as is. WBPchur 💬●✒️●💛 23:46, 20 July 2020 (UTC).
- WBPchur, I think if it is just that one tweet it should be left out. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 15:08, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
- Emir of Wikipedia, probably in 'Political Career' somewhere. Possibly in 'Other Endorsements'. It isn't an endorsement though, an opinion. Where would you suggest? WBPchur 💬●✒️●💛 22:11, 19 July 2020 (UTC).
- WBPchur, where in the article do you think this should be mentioned? Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 21:55, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 18 March 2022
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please add at least a sentence or two about Schiff's tweets about. Volodymyr Zelenskyy's attire in his address to the US (“I understand times are hard, but doesn’t the President of the Ukraine own a suit?”) and the pushback he's received for the comments. Plenty of secondary sources on this. Here are a few: [1], [2], [3], [4] Thanks. 2600:1003:B85F:3828:0:4D:D9E9:501 (talk) 01:37, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
- Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the
{{edit semi-protected}}
template. WP:NOTNEWS, this doesn't seem like the kind of detail a biography needs. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:47, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
Investigation section has a biased tone
The investigation section of this article presents details of a defamation case from only one point of view, the defendants. In order to be a reasonable article it needs to have both perspectives. Even some of the citations are those of the defendants in the case. Mkstokes (talk) 00:01, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- We follow reliable sources around here. TarnishedPathtalk 02:16, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- Regardless of whichever way you fall on this issue, there is an undue weight problem. The section should be severely trimmed to one small paragraph. Viriditas (talk) 02:26, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- Agreed. There is a significant amount of material that is completely irrelevant to the Atlantis investigation. Mkstokes (talk) 07:54, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- But the article cites as a "reliable source" the company and individual that lost the defamation case. How can a source guilty of defamation be cited as a reliable source? Furthermore, Peter Schiff's actions during the defamatory interview is totally irrelevant to the Atlantis investigation. It is only cited here to further cast aspersions on Peter Schiff, the individual who won the suit and was not found guilty of anything related to the investigation. Mkstokes (talk) 07:52, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- Furthermore, there's an uncited quote attributed to Peter Schiff. "There was no way those allegations were true, but once those stories broke, the bank's business imploded." Where does that come from? Definitely not the NY Times article. Mkstokes (talk) 08:09, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- Lost the defamation case? If you're referring to the New York Times I think you might be incorrect. To the best of my knowledge they weren't a party to the proceedings being a US entity which has different standards when it comes to defamation. TarnishedPathtalk 12:29, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- You cite 60 Minutes Australia (see #21). They were the organization that created the defamatory content. You cite Nick McKenzie's article (see #22). He's the interviewer that uttered the defamatory content during the 60 Minutes interview. Finally, you cite The Age's article written by Nick McKenzie. The Age was a party to the defamation lawsuit brought by Peter Schiff and well as Nine Network, Nick McKenzie, Charlotte Grieve, and Joel Tozer. All were found to have defamed Mr. Schiff and both Nine Network and The Age had to pay a fine plus court costs. Yet they are cited as "reliable sources" though they clearly have a conflict of interest. Even Matthew Goldstein has a conflict of interest in this as he was involved in the initial reporting of the investigation as well as subsequent reporting. "Questionable sources are those that have a poor reputation for checking the facts, lack meaningful editorial oversight, or have an apparent conflict of interest." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability#Questionable_sources Mkstokes (talk) 15:21, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- As mentioned before, this section also run afoul of the Neutral Point of View policy. Wikipedia:Neutral point of view "Neutrality requires that mainspace articles and pages fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources, in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint in those sources." This portion of the article provides a single viewpoint, that of the accusers. Mkstokes (talk) 15:29, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- Lost the defamation case? If you're referring to the New York Times I think you might be incorrect. To the best of my knowledge they weren't a party to the proceedings being a US entity which has different standards when it comes to defamation. TarnishedPathtalk 12:29, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- Regardless of whichever way you fall on this issue, there is an undue weight problem. The section should be severely trimmed to one small paragraph. Viriditas (talk) 02:26, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- Note, this is not rocket science and does not require extensive discussion. Please trim the section down to one paragraph that represents the facts using the best and latest sources. I recommend filing a NPOV report if the two of you can’t figure this out. Viriditas (talk) 17:10, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- I don’t see the utility in trimming it to one paragraph. This is an important event in his career, he lost a bank over it Markj573 (talk) 17:38, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- That’s because this has nothing to do with "utility" and everything to do with undue weight. "Operation Atlantis yielded no charges of money laundering or any other illegal activity…Schiff was paid $550,000 and all versions of the broadcast were permanently removed by the respondents". We don’t get to ignore those facts and pretend that they never happened. Our article has to follow the facts. Viriditas (talk) 17:45, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- I agree, @Viriditas. This section should be trimmed down to one paragraph that represents the facts. I'll await for @TarnishedPath to make edits towards that consensus resolution. Here's my suggestion:
- "The Age reported that Euro Pacific Bank became the target of Operation Atlantis, the world's largest tax evasion probe. On June 30, 2022, the Puerto Rico Office of the Commissioner of Financial Institutions announced they had suspended the operations of Puerto Rico-based Euro Pacific International Bank, which officials said was under suspicion of facilitating money laundering and offshore tax evasion. (https://apnews.com/article/caribbean-money-laundering-puerto-rico-san-juan-efb421edca78f0d477c665d346658373) Furthermore, the OCIF ordered Euro Pacific Bank to be shut down due to insufficient capitol. The final agreement between Euro Pacific Bank and the OCIF committed the bank to maintaining cash reserves sufficient to cover all deposits, outstanding debts to creditors, and other operating expenses. (https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/schiffeuro-pacific-bank-epb-and-puerto-rican-regulator-reach-agreement-on-details-of-final-liquidation-of-epb-and-guarantee-return-of-all-depositors-funds-as-promised-by-schiff-301625675.html)
- Operation Atlantis yielded no charges of money laundering or any other illegal activity. In 2022 Schiff filed civil action against the Nine Network and The Age newspaper for defamation over the Australian 60 Minutes interview and subsequent Age articles. On November 21 the civil action was settled. As part of the settlement, Schiff was paid $550,000 by Nine Networks and The Age, and all versions of the broadcast were permanently removed by the respondents." Mkstokes (talk) 17:50, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- That’s more than a short paragraph, I was worried about trimming it too much Markj573 (talk) 17:58, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- This Peter Schiff quote should remain in the article to have his perspective on the matter "There was no way those allegations were true, but once those stories broke, the bank's business imploded." Markj573 (talk) 18:03, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- I kind of agree, but Schiff's statement is not factual. That's why I included the reference to his press release with his lawyer. That includes his perspective. (see prnewswire reference) I'm assuming the other references provided by @TarnishedPath will remain. Mkstokes (talk) 18:09, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- The page has his opinions on the gold standard and other issues. Somewhat might want to know his opinions on the case but be too lazy to click on the link.
- “According to Peter Schiff ‘There was no way those allegations were true, but once those stories broke, the bank's business imploded.’” Markj573 (talk) 18:22, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- For the purpose of gaining consensus on the edits, I'm okay with adding the Peter Schiff quote. Thus the proposed Investigation section would go as follows:
- On June 30, 2022, the Puerto Rico Office of the Commissioner of Financial Institutions (OCIF) announced they had suspended the operations of Puerto Rico-based Euro Pacific International Bank, which officials said was under suspicion of facilitating money laundering and offshore tax evasion. The OCIF ordered Euro Pacific Bank to be shut down due to insufficient capitol and committed the bank to maintaining cash reserves sufficient to cover all deposits, outstanding debts to creditors, and other operating expenses. Schiff claimed this was due to the allegations by 60 Minutes Australia, The Age newspaper, and the subsequent investigations, saying, "There was no way those allegations were true, but once those stories broke, the bank's business imploded." Operation Atlantis yielded no charges of money laundering or any other illegal activity. In 2022 Schiff filed civil action against the Nine Network and The Age newspaper for defamation over the Australian 60 Minutes interview and subsequent Age articles. On November 21 the civil action was settled. As part of the settlement, Schiff was paid $550,000 by Nine Networks and The Age, and all versions of the broadcast were permanently removed by the respondents. Mkstokes (talk) 19:15, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- I kind of agree, but Schiff's statement is not factual. That's why I included the reference to his press release with his lawyer. That includes his perspective. (see prnewswire reference) I'm assuming the other references provided by @TarnishedPath will remain. Mkstokes (talk) 18:09, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- This Peter Schiff quote should remain in the article to have his perspective on the matter "There was no way those allegations were true, but once those stories broke, the bank's business imploded." Markj573 (talk) 18:03, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- That’s more than a short paragraph, I was worried about trimming it too much Markj573 (talk) 17:58, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- I don’t see the utility in trimming it to one paragraph. This is an important event in his career, he lost a bank over it Markj573 (talk) 17:38, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- Biography articles of living people
- C-Class biography articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- C-Class Anti-war articles
- Low-importance Anti-war articles
- C-Class politics articles
- Low-importance politics articles
- C-Class American politics articles
- Unknown-importance American politics articles
- American politics task force articles
- C-Class Libertarianism articles
- Low-importance Libertarianism articles
- WikiProject Libertarianism articles
- WikiProject Politics articles
- C-Class Skepticism articles
- Low-importance Skepticism articles
- WikiProject Skepticism articles
- C-Class Alternative Views articles
- Low-importance Alternative Views articles
- WikiProject Alternative Views articles
- C-Class Connecticut articles
- Low-importance Connecticut articles
- WikiProject Connecticut articles
- C-Class Internet culture articles
- Low-importance Internet culture articles
- WikiProject Internet culture articles
- C-Class WikiProject Business articles
- Low-importance WikiProject Business articles
- WikiProject Business articles
- C-Class Economics articles
- Low-importance Economics articles
- WikiProject Economics articles
- C-Class Finance & Investment articles
- Low-importance Finance & Investment articles
- WikiProject Finance & Investment articles
- C-Class University of California articles
- Low-importance University of California articles
- Unknown-importance University of California, Berkeley articles
- WikiProject University of California articles
- Articles edited by connected contributors