The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on this article (except in limited circumstances)
Changes challenged by reversion may not be reinstated without affirmative consensus on the talk page
Violations of any of these restrictions should be reported immediately to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard.
Editors who are aware of this topic being designated a contentious topic and who violate these restrictions may be sanctioned by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offense.
With respect to the WP:1RR restriction:
Edits made solely to enforce any clearly established consensus are exempt from all edit-warring restrictions.
Edits made which remove or otherwise change any material placed by clearly established consensus, without first obtaining consensus to do so, may be treated in the same manner as obvious vandalism.
In order to be considered "clearly established" the consensus must be proven by prior talk-page discussion.
Reverts of edits made by anonymous (IP) editors are exempt from the 1RR but are subject to the usual rules on edit warring. If you are in doubt, contact an administrator for assistance.
Whenever you are relying on one of these exemptions, you should refer to it in your edit summary and, if applicable, link to the discussion where consensus was clearly established.
If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. Remember: When in doubt, don't revert!
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
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 sourcedmust 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 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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles 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.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Constructed languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of constructed languages 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.Constructed languagesWikipedia:WikiProject Constructed languagesTemplate:WikiProject Constructed languagesconstructed language articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Finance & Investment, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Finance and Investment 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.Finance & InvestmentWikipedia:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentTemplate:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentFinance & Investment articles
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football 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.FootballWikipedia:WikiProject FootballTemplate:WikiProject Footballfootball articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hungary, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hungary 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.HungaryWikipedia:WikiProject HungaryTemplate:WikiProject HungaryHungary articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Due to Mr Soro's large and consistent donations to political organisations and figures, surely it would make sense to add Political donor to the opening of the lead paragraph.
Interested to here the thoughts about this from other users. Basedosaurus (talk) 00:44, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes to this. And actually it should say "political activist", as Mr. Soros has used his funds extensively to fund political actions and activities that he supports. — Preceding unsigned comment added by StorG (talk • contribs) 04:27, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. I don't think the term "philanthropist" is accurate. A more accurate and neutral term would be Ideologue. It was revealed today* that he is a major funder of the far-right, AfD-aligned magazine, Compact. While Soros does engage in some traditional philanthropic activities, a majority of his efforts apear be directed towards influencing public opinion and political discourse. Typically this is referred to as "influence broker" which implies a heavy finance aspect. *https://www.vanityfair.com/news/story/progressive-mega-donor-funding-right-wing-ideas --72.72.142.125 (talk) 19:30, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
At the bottom of the intro, none of the sources provide evidence that far-right theorists have promoted FALSE claims that characterize Soros as a dangerous "puppet master" behind alleged global plots. There are claims, but they are not verifiably false, and being that the claims themselves have not been verified true or false, perhaps it is best to remove that entire sentence due to being speculative/opinionated. Ainchamama (talk) 16:00, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Smear," "bizarre," and "outlandish" do appear in those sources. No doubt you can find something that covers the "false" if you look around. Acroterion(talk)17:39, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Completely agree with @Ainchamama: here. I'd also add that the paragraph itself is unsuited for the intro as it neglects to mention that there are many controversies and legitimate criticisms of Soros that are widespread (and subsequently covered throughout the article). The paragraph is so specific and dismissive of these "far right" criticisms of Soros that it suggests he is merely a charitable philanthropist victim to smears, when the reality is there are many others who are not "far right" who would argue that's far from the truth. I think we should just chuck the whole paragraph and replace it with something like "Soros remains a figure of great controversy, with both his business practices and political funding being the subjected to a mixture of praise and criticism alike. He has been the subject of many conspiracy theories, with many fringe political groups speculating as to the extent of his global influence in geopolitical and economic affairs". --Jkaharper (talk) 23:36, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What "legitimate criticisms"? There are none that I am aware of after reading our article (you don't mean Société Générale, do you? One comment made by Paul Krugman?) that would justify such a wishy washy statement in the lead that could appear to give credence to George Soros conspiracy theories. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:15, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well this might be news to you, but when you possess the power to crash a market (or to deepen a crash by betting on it), that has repercussions for national governments and for ordinary people. There's a huge ethical debate on whether that should be possible. Plenty of criticism of him and his practices online if you just look. Try here, here, here, and here. All pass WP:RS and are mainstream sources. --Jkaharper (talk) 17:00, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Clicked the first link, it starts with New York (CNN) - Elon Musk launched a baseless Twitter attack on George Soros, a frequent target for antisemitic conspiracy theories, accusing the financier of hating humanity days after Soros disclosed having sold off a modest stake in Tesla. It goes on to cite no legitimate criticism of Soros, so an odd choice by you to present this as though it does. In fact it highlights the conspiracy theories... Soros, 92, is a longtime target of right wing conspiracy theorists and of antisemites. He is a prominent contributor to Democratic candidates and liberal causes. Open Secrets, which tracks political contributions, shows he contributed $50 million to the Democracy PAC II Superpac in November, and $125 million in the fall of 2022. He is also founder and the major contributor of the Open Society Foundations, with a stated aim of working for justice, democratic governance, and human rights. It has raised the ire of some authoritarian regimes, including that of Viktor Orban, prime minister of Soros’ native Hungary. Orban is an ally of Russian president Vladimir Putin, accused of his own authoritarian moves in Hungary. Attacks on Soros have increased in recent years alongside a broader increase in incidents of antisemitic attacks. The ADL said that US antisemitic incidents reached their highest level last year since the group began recording them in 1979. Then it continues with the rise of the right-wing on Twitter. The Guardian starts off mentioning unspecified "failures" in their subheading, then declares It is for this reason that Soros’s failures are so telling; they are the failures not merely of one man, but of an entire class – and an entire way of understanding the world. The JC notes that Soros is partisan. Shocker. WP:NEWSWEEK is unreliable and that's noted as an opinion piece written by a conservative, Josh Hammer, again complaining that Soros is partisan.
This isn't news to me. It's not news to anybody. You know what is news to me? You need to brush up on WP:CIVIL. I'm not responding to you again with that tone. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:20, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You don't sound at all unbiased or impartial with how you've approached this conversation alone. This reads like pure apologism for Soros with a touch of temper to boot. Just because you don't think the criticism is valid doesn't mean a Wikipedia page, which is by nature supposed to be impartial, should take sides. I would actually say forget the more neutral replacement--which you describe as "wishy-washy"-- and just put nothing there at all for that third paragraph, as it is totally unnecessary. But you give the impression that even just suggesting that will lead to either more anger, or maybe being ignored entirely.
There are countless valid criticisms of George Soros and you seem to be using the anti-semetic label to destroy any valid criticism. There are anti-semetic conspiracy theories thst exist around Soros. But there are criticisms as well. AtypicalPhantom (talk) 21:12, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please share some of that "valid" criticism. I haven't seen anything but globalist and anti-semetic conspiracy theorizing. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:18, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You agree it's a fact? Cool. Put it on the page. Don't even need to call it criticism, let folks decide for themselves. Muboshgu thinks it's cool because other people do questionable stuff too, that's perfectly fine. Everyone's entitled to an opinion, so unless something about this fact you acknowledge disturbs you, no reason not to add it, is there? 75.113.98.48 (talk) 20:07, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They focus on end-of-life issues. One could criticize our society for how we handle terminal illness. We're more humane with our pets in many cases. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:28, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In the article, at the subection "Central and Eastern Europe" of the section https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Soros#Political_involvement there is, at points, constant mention of a country called "Macedonia". Northern Macedonia is the recognized international name of the referenced country and that should be reflected in a respectable source like wikipeda.
An edit request should be put forward and a change should be made to the article, substituting "Macedonia" with "Northern Macedonia" at all instances of this country's name. 155.207.84.157 (talk) 10:36, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is there no neutral (i.e non-self-reference) for his alleged contribution to charity???
The only ref provided for his alleged "donation" to charity of usd 32b is the "open society" which was founded and run by him amd his family. Is there not a single neutral reference to support that claim??? How can we state it like a fact and support the same with ONE citation which almost reads like "I (as in soros) say so"??? 117.194.192.180 (talk) 19:04, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Charliehdb (talk) 10:38, 20 May 2024 (UTC)