Talk:Elon Musk

Where do we want to cover the Errol stuff?

Errol has falsely claimed to have funded Zip2, was reliably accused of abuse of his wife and children, reportedly suffers from very severe mental illness, and fathered two children with his former stepdaughter. He also claims to have shot and killed multiple people.

On the one hand, Errol's primary notability (aside from 1970s politics) is from the abuse allegations against him. I created Familial relationships of Errol Musk try to get that info OFF Elon and Maye's respective BLPs -- you don't document an abuser on their victim's BLP; but that article has its own problems because it doesn't cover Errol's political career like a BLP should.

Where should we put what is known about Errol? If he weren't a media figure with famous family, perhaps we could just delete him away, but because he's become a media gadfly, it's not fair to Elon et al for us to NOT document his behavior somewhere. Could we put it in a sub-article of Elon's or Maye's BLP? Feoffer (talk) 10:32, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Errol's primary notability is being the father of Elon, and Wikipedia is not a soapbox for scandalmongering even if is done in the name of fairness. 2601:642:4600:D3B0:F957:2BB0:729:9CD1 (talk) 01:08, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Are you seriously claiming that this is, quote, "Scandalmongering: promoting things "heard through the grapevine" or gossiping"?

I think you're confusing "scandalmongering" with "extremely widely covered scandals that have drawn massive amounts of public interest". Like, I'd wager that probably 20% or so of the US population have heard of "the emerald mine", even if they can't name Errol by name.

And while we're here, I'll add as an aside that I think it's wrong to mention Haldeman's move to South Africa and living like Indiana Jones, while omitting the fact that he moved to South Africa because he was a massive supporter of Apartheid. I'm not going to be [WP:B] without support from others on this topic, however. -- Rei (talk) 03:01, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

I'm saying that creating an article about Errol primarily to document his scandals would be an attack page. Being a rotten bastard isn't a ticket to having a Wikipedia page. 2601:642:4600:D3B0:188C:EEBE:3AC7:1073 (talk) 04:51, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

Consensus about interviews with otherwise unreliable sources

Hey, quick question - Elon did an interview with Jordan Peterson recently that was streamed on the Daily Wire. Not a reliable source normally, but here it’s straight from the horse’s mouth. What are everyone’s feelings on using articles quoting that interview as a source for such? Snokalok (talk) 23:56, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Let's wait a day or two and see if a more reliable publication reports on the contents of the interview (as I suspect one will). QRep2020 (talk) 01:54, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Since it is a video interview and it would pass the verifiability test, it seems good to me. Any other publication will simply repost the original video, no not sure how that improves anything. Just my thoughts. JamieBrown2011 (talk) 08:10, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 23 July 2024

Much of the below paragraph is largely embellished and misrepresent the facts. The articles referenced are subjective opinion pieces. Much of what is written in the paragraph also echos the opinions of the articles, and whomever wrote the paragraph initially. This should state facts only, and not be embellished or stuffed full of unqualifiable opinions. Below is the original paragraph, and a rewrite:

Please change X: Musk has expressed views that have made him a polarizing figure.[5] He has been criticized for making unscientific and misleading statements, including COVID-19 misinformation, promoting right-wing conspiracy theories, and "endorsing an antisemitic theory",[6] the latter of which he later apologized for.[5][7] His ownership of Twitter has been similarly controversial, being marked by layoffs of large numbers of employees, an increase in hate speech, misinformation and disinformation posts on the website, and changes to Twitter Blue verification.

To Y: Musk has been seen as a polarizing figure. He has criticized COVID-19, made comments that would generally support right-wing ideas, and made a comment regarding a version of the “great replacement theory." He later apologized for this statement. Upon acquisition of Twitter, Musk laid off a large number of employees and make changes to the "Twitter Blue" verification system. Mst3kfan13 (talk) 19:14, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Please educate yourself about the many Talk page discussions concerning this paragraph first. QRep2020 (talk) 03:18, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit extended-protected}} template. Change noted as controversial due to response received above, changes to controversial topics are likely to need consensus on this page. ASUKITE 16:12, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Musk's daughter has gone public - time to include her name?

First she wrote a critical response on Threads to Elon's interview, then followed it up with [1] an interview with NBC - and under her name, not an alias / anonymously.

My read is that we should probably include her name now instead of just referencing her indirectly, now that she's no longer trying to remain private (indeed, she refers to herself as "an H-list celebrity" on her Threads account). -- Rei (talk) 02:55, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

Makes sense to me. WP:BLPNAME is for low-profile persons. I think going public with interviews etc. entails a choice to forgo the privacy of a low-profile, private person. Endwise (talk) 11:57, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

"Still alive"

I made this change because it seemed pretty unnecessary to specify this. First because the NBC interview makes it obvious, and also because it was evident that Musk spoke figuratively. It would have been obvious even he hadn't used the word "essentially".

Did anyone in the media or in the public think that his child was literally dead ? If so, the NBC interview would have been treated as some kind of breaking news, which it wasn't. What do you think ? Psychloppos (talk) 08:06, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

The passage as a whole seems of undue length. I don't see why the Financial Times quote is there at all. If Musk believes in a neo-Marxist menace, it suffices to say that he believes it. Whether it exists or other people believe in it is irrelevant for the purpose of this article. More broadly, there is no basis in NPOV to quote directly so long as the sources are faithfully represented, and doing so makes for tiresome reading. 98.51.228.103 (talk) 16:36, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

What is most relevant is Musk's statements about his child, which have attracted media attention lately. The fact that he attributes the situation to a tangential menace is tangential. A direct quote may help avoid misquoting him. Psychloppos (talk) 17:27, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 28 July 2024

Change "12" in infobox ("Children") to "12, including Vivian Jenna Wilson", because an article has been created. J3133 (talk) 08:27, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

 On hold until Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vivian Jenna Wilson is closed. No point in adding the link if it will need to get removed shortly afterwards. If the article is kept, please re-open the request. Left guide (talk) 01:57, 29 July 2024 (UTC)