[go: nahoru, domu]
Jump to content

Talk:Elon Musk

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former featured article candidateElon Musk is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Good articleElon Musk has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Did You Know Article milestones
DateProcessResult
June 4, 2021Good article nomineeListed
July 24, 2021Peer reviewNot reviewed
August 23, 2022Featured article candidateNot promoted
November 1, 2022Good article reassessmentKept
Did You Know A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on June 15, 2021.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Elon Musk lost $16.3 billion in a single day, the largest in the history of the Bloomberg Billionaires Index?
Current status: Former featured article candidate, current good article

Main Image

[edit]

Currently, the main image in the infobox is an image from 2023. However, a more recent image taken by me of Musk at a conference in Montana last March may be better as it is more recent. I would like to know what you all think Wcamp9 (talk) 03:29, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

looks like he got manbewbs in that pic 122.54.207.116 (talk) 00:15, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
At this point, we have cycled through several images in the past month. I recommend we stick with the current selection and leave it be for now. Towards that, I will add a comment to the article's source code asking that future image changes be first discussed here. QRep2020 (talk) QRep2020 (talk) 02:30, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Wcamp9 To be frank, it’s a bad photo. It makes him look sad. Alexysun (talk) 10:12, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The current image is low-quality. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 00:09, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The images that are getting replaced in infobox are all of low-quality/low-resolution. I have reinstated the last stable, high-quality/high-resolution image of Musk to the infobox. Svampesky (talk) 03:45, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 September 2024

[edit]

(EDUCATION) where he earned two degrees: a Bachelor of Arts in economics, and a Bachelor of Science in physics from the university's Wharton School. (Interchange the words physics and economics words) Shadabqurashi (talk) 05:54, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Bunnypranav (talk) 08:28, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Profile image

[edit]

The profile image keeps getting changed. It is probably the least important element from an encyclopedic standpoint and yet gets so much editor attention as of late. Can we please decide on a semi-permanent image? 22:50, 6 September 2024 (UTC) QRep2020

@QRep2020 I put the image back to the most recent 2023 image rather than keep the current image where he looks unkempt. From WP:BLPIMAGE "mages of living persons should not be used out of context to present a person in a false or disparaging light. This is particularly important for police booking photographs (mugshots), or situations where the subject did not expect to be photographed." Several of the images people have used were from different angles or were in crowd situations where he wasn't expecting a photograph. The one I now put back is from an official photo when he was expected to be photographed. Ergzay (talk) 23:47, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Wcamp9 I suggest discussing before changing the image. Pinging you as you've changed the image several times. Ergzay (talk) 23:51, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This [[1]] seems to be a crisper image. Slatersteven (talk) 14:49, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RfC: Infobox image

[edit]

Which of the images below should appear on the infobox? elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 16:02, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following are images that have been used in the last two years. Options D and G are images that have not been used in the infobox and have been added to elicit discussion. The infobox image should not be changed during the duration of this RfC.

  • (Option A; 2018)
    (Option A; 2018)
  • (Option B; 2022)
    (Option B; 2022)
  • (Option C; 2022)
    (Option C; 2022)
  • (Option D; 2023)
    (Option D; 2023)
  • (Option E; 2023)
    (Option E; 2023)
  • (Option F; 2024)
    (Option F; 2024)
  • (Option G; 2021)
    (Option G; 2021)

elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 16:02, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

[edit]
The Alphabet does not go A B C D F. Slatersteven (talk) 14:44, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm pretty sure he's saying either A or E. AuroraANovaUma ^-^ (talk) 16:44, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Option A or Option B - Both have the best lighting and expressions. C has bad lighting, D depicts him sweating and with an unprofessional facial expression, E could be higher resolution, F is too low resolution, and G is especially unprofessional. That said, please use this higher resolution version of option A instead if that's the one you're going to use. (edit: the picture used on this list was changed to the higher resolution version I recommended) AuroraANovaUma ^-^ (talk) 16:52, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Option B has pretty bad lighting as the camera was white balancing for the blue background making him look green. Also his facial expressions look off. Ergzay (talk) 18:10, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Four of these are basically the same picture, any of these works as a top photo although in general I would lean towards one of the ones where he is in generic business dress rather than branded stuff because this page covers the whole breadth of the subject's experience and accomplishments, those seem like better pictures for SpaceX or Tesla Inc. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:07, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    And even then, neither of the two are professional images and Option F is low quality. AuroraANovaUma ^-^ (talk) 17:56, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Option E — Option A is too old, 6 years old at this point. Option F and Option D make him look bad, additionally Option D has likely copyrighted trademark logos in it. Option B, C, D and F all have him looking away from the camera making them poor options. That remains Option E and Option G as the valid options. Of the two Option G has unkempt hair so I'll go with Option E. Edit: Option F and Option G are both completely out as they are low quality. I forgot to check by clicking on them and they're both full of camera sensor noise so neither is any good. Ergzay (talk) 18:00, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Wouldn't the copyrighted logos fall under de minimis? They're not the focal point of the photo; Elon Musk is. AuroraANovaUma ^-^ (talk) 18:03, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, but we're arguing degrees here. An image without copyrighted logos (holding everything else equal) is better than one with copyrighted logos. Ergzay (talk) 18:06, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree and I wasn't saying the image should be used. The image is very unflattering and you can even see some sweat on his face. AuroraANovaUma ^-^ (talk) 18:10, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    No thats just not true, in some contexts an imagine with a copyrighted logo (holding everything else equal) is better than one one without. This just isn't one of those contexts. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 14:52, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Only in some cases would an image with trademarks and copyrighted logos be better to use. This would not be one of them, however we're looking for the best image of Elon to use, and Option D ain't it. It's a pretty unflattering image of him. AuroraANovaUma ^-^ (talk) 14:58, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree that this isn't one of them and we agree on the unsuitability of the logo shirt pics in this context, I'm just pointing out that your generalized statement that holding everything else equal we prefer images without copyrighted logos isn't true. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 15:32, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's also important to note that a choice of Option A will prompt a lot of editors to try and replace it with newer images given that it's so old. 2018 was two years before covid happened, as a benchmark in people's minds. Ergzay (talk) 18:05, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I think that it does not really matter that Option A is old. The image is the most high quality, and I believe that matters more than age. An example is the page for Neil Armstrong, the main image was more than 40 years before his death, and is better compared to the images taken of him later in his life. Wcamp9 (talk) 15:53, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That was because the peak of Neil Armstrong's career and what he is most well known for is landing on the moon. This is the same across all pictures of astronauts. Ergzay (talk) 21:08, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • (invited by the bot) "A" is best. Looks neutral and representative. B & C are bad. "E" is non-typical. The rest are OK. You really should ask everybody to weigh in on every image; otherwise weird things could happen. North8000 (talk) 15:19, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • ElijahPepe My preference is for Option E. I think we should use one of the photos where he appears prepared for a formal portrait, so not G, F, or D.
Option A is too old, or will soon enough be too old. He looks quite different now than he did then. I agree with the person who said people will keep independently changing it if it is left as Option A.
Option B has him looking away at an odd angle, with branding in the background, and Option C looks strange because of the black suit blending into the black backdrop, and because he is looking away.
Option E does make him look a bit like he's running for political office, but it looks much more like a formal portrait than the others, except for A, and because it is more recent, and he is a living person, it is more accurate and helpful than A. Vsst (talk) 07:29, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Option E is lower quality than Option A Wcamp9 (talk) 18:40, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you're right on that. And having now had the chance to view them on desktop, I think A is also the more flattering picture by far. E looked a lot better on mobile than it actually appears at higher resolution/larger size, though I feel the opposite is the case for A.
And at the larger size, what I perceived to be a difference caused by the relative age of the photos is less apparent.
More people will view this photo on mobile than on desktop, but perhaps other phone screens might handle it better than mine does, too.
So I have changed my mind on this. Option A is best.
I do suspect it might be possible to hunt down a higher quality version of E, if we were so motivated, though.
Vsst (talk) 20:29, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Could you elaborate on what "glazed portraits" means? elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 03:53, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
His eyes appear glazed over in them and the photography resembles what you see in portraiture. Option C is a crisp digital photograph and has less of a stuffy, contrived look to it without being candid. QRep2020 (talk) 17:03, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Option C makes him look bad as he's frowning. Ergzay (talk) 05:26, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not to mention that it has no contrast AuroraANovaUma ^-^ (talk) 14:05, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Option A. F and G are of relatively poor quality for purposes of a lede image. B and D are needlessly unflattering depictions of him; the former depicts him frowning and looks like he hasn't bathed while his facial expression in the latter makes him look chimp-like. C has a dark background which obscures the outline of his head. While E is a better choice than most of the above mentioned, the way it is framed (particularly with the flag in the background) makes him look like an elected official which he is not; hence my opposition to it. Emiya1980 (talk) 23:38, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

[edit]

Remove "conservative political activist" from leading statement.

[edit]

This is a charged and controversial statement presented as if it were an established fact, which does not adhere to Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy. If it is to remain in the article, its placement should be altered and rephrased as (for example): "several commentators and media outlets have described Musk as a conservative political activist". BozzaNova69 (talk) 03:42, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, While (no doubt) RS can be found for saying it, it is also very much this year's news story. But I am unsure that (in the great scheme of things) this is part of his notability, rather his notably is why this is getting coverage. Slatersteven (talk) 09:40, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, it should be removed or put in another section of the article. Opok2021 (talk) 21:02, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I removed it as it violates MOS:ROLEBIO. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:26, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Good to hear, thank you. Opok2021 (talk) 02:27, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Taylor Swift...

[edit]

I think this needs a sentence distillation, surely. Electricmaster (talk) 16:33, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As disgusting as it is, I doubt the story will last or that there will be any impact on anyone. Trump's statement that "Taylor Swift will pay a price for endorsing Kamala Harris" is much more dangerous. O3000, Ret. (talk) 17:55, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Either way, it should be mentioned. Musk does have a reported and found in court history of sexual harassment and flatly his commentary should be included to that. Coasterghost (talk) 00:00, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is he saying that he wants Taylor Swift to be the mother of his 13th child or is he saying that he wants her to adopt one of his 12 known children? Have any reliable sources discussed this ambiguity? Cullen328 (talk) 03:12, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think the meaning is pretty clear, but here are some interpretations in the press:
QRep2020 (talk) 04:01, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think that it is interesting that Variety used the phrase "12 known children". Those two sources clearly interpret his intention as "have unprotected sex with her" as opposed to "get rid of an unwanted kid by sending one of his multiple toddlers to her". Cullen328 (talk) 04:39, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rolling Stone is not reliable for politics. Trump says plenty of outlandish statements, yet his article is mostly barren of them. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 05:49, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The RS article isn't cited for reporting political facts, but for describing a seemingly gross parasocial interaction as such. I can remove the political drapery from the quotation if that helps. QRep2020 (talk) 14:01, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
New York Magazine: https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/elon-musk-taylor-swift-response-worse-than-you-think.html - "Musk is openly sexually harassing Swift on X for expressing a political opinion; he has previously been accused of sexual misconduct (which he denies). And the remark ties in with other weird and unsettling things the billionaire has said. Musk — who has fathered at least 12 children with three women — is obsessed with low birth rates, which has led to him spreading the “great replacement theory,” a white-supremacist conspiracy theory (though he says he doesn’t “subscribe to that”)." Coasterghost (talk) 08:53, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Coasterghost He deleted and apologized for making the tweet that _could be interpreted_ as supporting great replacement theory, calling it "one of the most foolish, if not the most foolish, thing I've done". The wikipedia page itself talks about that. He never made any statement outright expressing it. And secondly being obsessed with low birth rates has nothing to do with replacement theory nonsense. Many people (myself included) in many countries on earth are obsessed with low birth rates and very few of them subscribe to white-supremacist nonsense. Ergzay (talk) 05:39, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ergzay And? Just because he deleted and apologized for it doesn't make it as if it never has happened. with. Given the United States political climate, and his support of Trump, and JD Vance's (Republican Vice President Running-mate) obsession about childless adults its very easy to connect the dots. Also the sheer fact of his 'offer' can be constituted alone on sexual harassment, which is a notion that I brought up in the quote. Additionally he has reshared content that is directly pointed to the great replacement theory. This has been covered by online media as well. So say what you will, but his apology is for all intents and purposes moot considering the views he has repeatedly shared. Mind you we are talking about a man, a United States Defense Contractor via SpaceX who is now on the radar of the United States Secret Service for his postings given the second assassination attempt of Donald Trump. Coasterghost (talk) 13:44, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Coasterghost You didn't respond to what I wrote and instead chose to talk on unrelated topics. You should review WP:SOAPBOX. Ergzay (talk) 09:52, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ergzay I did respond. First and Foremost, the quote that I shared from the New York Magazine was talking about him sexually harassing Taylor Swift and the inclusion of that quote was to add an additional source citing that is reliable for politics. New York Magazine is reliable for politics.
Secondly, going to your comment which you took particular notice to the inclusion on the the great replacement theory in the quote I had used. While he did not explicitly type it out, he has indicated through this actions that he does indeed support the great replacement theory. To quote The New Republic (which is marked reliable for politics) story that I linked after the mention of his tweet; But even if you accept this bogus distinction, the video Musk is actively endorsing—his pinned tweet said, “This is actually happening!”—absolutely does allege a vast conspiracy. It describes an “open borders plan to entrench single party rule,” in which congressional Democrats and the White House deliberately allow in “millions” and “keep them in the country at all costs,” all for the purpose of ensuring “their loyalty to the political party that imported them.” That fits pretty well into the wording on the great replacement theory in the United States page.
Furthermore, his comments regarding Taylor Swift offering her a child after she endorsed Kamala Harris, was interpreted by many as offering to father her child and I was connecting that to his endorsement for the 2024 election.
At the end of the day he did sexually harass Taylor Swift and that should potentially be noted in addition to his apology. However, there needs to be a discussion about his mentioning his defacto endorsement to the great replacement theory, because his actions speak louder then words. Coasterghost (talk) 13:08, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is more soap boxing and not related to what my comment reply was primarily about. You should look narrowly on what I actually wrote and not try to soap box on the wider topic. You should also review WP:RGW. Ergzay (talk) 15:43, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You are focused on his viewpoint of the Great Replacement Theory and his pseudo apology. That is what I am answering. His quote that you mentioned explicitly "one of the most foolish, if not the most foolish, thing I've done" is from November 29, 2023. It was also about posts the White House called “antisemitic and racist hate." The post that I am referring to, in my rebuttal to you is from March 19th of 2024. His apology does not give him carte blanche to continue to act with willful ignorance. Additionally the tweet at the heart of this, the Taylor Swift tweet is still up. https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1833728804579111268 Coasterghost (talk) 17:03, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Here’s two men who have been given all kinds of trips, money, fame, intelligence, and they consider others their property. Trump says he can grab any woman’s junk anytime anywhere. Something to that effect. Elon Musk chooses to hang around this man! The two of them create one of the grossest American pictures I can think of! These two man are so full of themselves, they’ll destroy women to satisfy themselves. Also known in the human species as gross pigs. 69.161.78.199 (talk) 06:38, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, disgusting and childishly low life as this is, its just gob shittery from someone who if they were not very very rich would be standing on street corners accosting passers-by. Its trivia. Slatersteven (talk) 10:10, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Electricmaster In what other instances do we put non-politicians making a (poor) joke on social media into biographical wikipedia pages purely on the point of the joke existing? If it causes some long term damage, it would make sense sure, but a joke that's going to be largely forgotten about within a few weeks, let alone months/years doesn't seem to be of Wikipedia relevance. Be careful about getting caught up in WP:TOOSOON and the media cycle in general. Wikipedia's not a tabloid. Ergzay (talk) 05:33, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We don't treat non-politicians differently from politicians... We treat public figures differently from non-public figures, both politicians and Musk are public figures so we treat them the same. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:17, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shivon Zilis

[edit]

Why is she not listed as one of Musk's partners in the infobox? I mean she has 3 children with him. 68.187.65.220 (talk) 11:57, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do RS say she is a partner, or just that she had had kids with him? Slatersteven (talk) 12:01, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We have some, but most don't call her that they just refer to her as an employee and baby mama. Do we have an actual consensus on whether repeat baby mamas count as partners for wiki purposes? One pregnancy I get it, lots of ways for that to happen... But two pregnancies, three kids, and cohabitating? Thats a partner of some kind... Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:22, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 16 September 2024

[edit]

Please change the first line calling Musk a “businessman” to add that he is a “conspiracy theorist.” While he is a businessman, the main reason why people know him and speak about him is because his conspiracy theory comments. 136.34.40.1 (talk) 21:49, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit extended-protected}} template. - FlightTime (open channel) 21:50, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wealth section shrunk too much?

[edit]

The wealth section has been shrunk down to two sentences. If it's only worth two sentences of summary I don't think it deserves its top-level section and the page that was created with the content is pretty small itself. Ergzay (talk) 05:50, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As it is going to change it will never be much use. Slatersteven (talk) 13:53, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Slatersteven "Never be much use" is kind of my point. If it's not important, it should be re-arranged to not be a top level entry at least. Ergzay (talk) 09:47, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vivian Musk

[edit]

Vivian is now a public figure. I think it's problematic, from a historian's perspective, to not include her dead name. I think there is a way to respectfully refer to her as previously being known as (redacted). It's an important fact in the life of someone that may one day become far more notable than they are now.

Currently, you have to go back as far as 2012 news sources to even find this information. We shouldn't decide to erase history like this just because it offends someone. It can be tastefully done as a footnote, or something.

Because this is a controversial issue, I am not making any changes to this page. But I think someone should make it happen if consensus is reached that it should. Luxdsg (talk) 18:55, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Luxdsg, your proposal is contrary to long established practice. Please read WP:DEADNAME and read it carefully. Cullen328 (talk) 19:01, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 19 September 2024

[edit]

In the Politics sections under Personal views and Twitter Usage change "Musk and Trump spoke for 2 h" to "Musk and Trump spoke for two hours" SomeoneOK (talk) 17:00, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Hyphenation Expert (talk) 18:35, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Elon_Musk&oldid=1246564658"