Talk:Martin Shkreli/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Semi-protected edit request on 22 September 2015

Is an insult to humanity. 61.153.53.133 (talk) 04:56, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Dear anon, while I agree with your sentiment, this is an encyclopedia, not Twitter. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:03, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

It's true but what specific edit are you asking us to make? Andrea Carter (at your service | my good deeds) 05:27, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Untitled

http://www.citizensforethics.org/legal-filings/entry/crew-uncovers-another-short-seller-gaming-the-regulatory-system

This is most certainly relevant to the article but please talk about it within the context of the article. Andrea Carter (at your service | my good deeds) 05:28, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Ticker symbol

Why not list the exchange and symbol every time a public company is mentioned? In this case, instead of writing "Retrophin", write "Retrophin (NASDAQ: RTRX)". 71.139.163.243 (talk) 14:29, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 September 2015

Make a separate section for the issues with Turing Pharmaceuticals - which has nothing to do with Retrophin. Iphicles (talk) 12:57, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

@Iphicles: Done. Andrea Carter (at your service | my good deeds) 14:44, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Accused of serious 'harassment'

Might be worthy of adding. http://www.cnbc.com/2015/09/22/controversial-drug-ceo-was-accused-of-serious-harassment.html Uhcord (talk) 23:51, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Political affiliation?

Is there any information on Martin Shkerli's political affiliation? 76.27.117.252 (talk) 15:33, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 September 2015

Change "he was criticized by several public health organizations" to "he was criticized by several public health organizations and social media outlets" 94.71.13.237 (talk) 13:53, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

 Not done - Please provide reliable sources that say "he was criticized by... social media outlets" - MrX 14:10, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Actually there's no source for "public health organizations" either. Some hospitals, doctors and insurance companies, yes. But "social media outlets" is really where the "outrage" happened. Volunteer Marek  15:57, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Availability of generic versions

The article wrongly states that "no company is currently manufacturing generic pyrimethamine.". This is correct but only for the US. The generic version of the drug is manufactured by several companies worldwide and is readily available outside the US at a price ranging from about 10 cents to a dollar a tablet. For example, in the UK its manufactured by GlaxoSmithKline and in Australia by Aspen Pharma. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.17.236.101 (talk) 01:51, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

In addition to this the article also claims that he took several WHO essential drugs out of the reach of millions. He only altered the price of 1 WHO drug which is only taken by several thousand in the USA and it is unclear if it is still within the reach of those who take it. I do think this man is quite greedy but lying about what he did is doing no one any services. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TacoSuperBatman (talk • contribs) 06:27, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

You're correct. Fixed it. Volunteer Marek  16:05, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Even his birthday is a joke...

April Fool Day. Let him burn in hell. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.204.96.85 (talk) 16:29, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 September 2015

Shkreli reversed the decision in response to "outrage" and lowered the price. Shkreli did not say what the new price would be, but expected a determination to be made over the next few weeks.[20]

108.171.130.163 (talk) 16:45, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

 Not done -

• Please be clear and precise in explaining and justifying the change.
• Please provide a specific description of the edit request, that is, specific text that should be removed and a verbatim copy of the text that should replace it. "Please change X" is not helpful and will often be rejected; the request should be of the form "please change X to Y because...".
• Please don't copy the entire article into the request. Only copy the part you're changing. If you copy the entire article into the request, you'll break navigation on the talk page, and another editor may remove your entire request.
• Please provide reliable sources if appropriate. All information in Wikipedia articles should be verifiable from reliable sources which are independent of the subject.

- MrX 16:49, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 September 2015

Please change... Shkreli reversed the decision in response to "outrage" and lowered the price back to $13.50 a few days later

It should read...

Shkreli reversed the decision in response to "outrage" and lowered the price. Shkreli did not say what the new price would be, but expected a determination to be made over the next few weeks.[20]

108.171.130.163 (talk) 16:51, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

I changed it to something closer to what the source says. In addition to what you noted, he has not lowered the price, just announced it. And "outrage" is a quote from the source, not from Shkreli. Kendall-K1 (talk) 17:04, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

the eSports stuff

Is it really that important? Seems like trivia. Volunteer Marek  17:42, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

I think it should stay. He has also acquired a DOTA2 team, Leviathan. If his team makes it into the LCS next go, the section will expand. I mean doesn't wikipedia usually note if someone owns a sports team? Though I'm probably biased as I follow LoL eSport competitions. Uhcord (talk) 03:09, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Is owning an "eSport" team more like owning the Yankees than it is like owning a WOW guild? Jonathunder (talk) 03:40, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Well, eSports are a $612 million and growing industry (not as large as major sports but it is much much younger than traditional sports by a large magnitude) with sponsors from companies such as Intel, Nvidia, Logitech, HTC, etc. Teams have gaming houses where they live and practice. They also have coaches, managers, and analysts. Tournaments have prize pools in the millions of dollars, such as the DOTA2 tournament The International 2015 which had a prize pool of US$18,429,613. So owning an eSports team (Samsung Galaxy White (owned by Samsung), SK Telecom T1, Team SoloMid, Fnatic, Evil Geniuses, Taipei Assassins, NewBee, Invictus Gaming) it is a tad bit more like owning the Yankees than it is like owning a WOW guild. It might be why people are investing in it and buying teams while it is young and relatively cheap. Uhcord (talk) 04:31, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

It's a pretty small part of the article, isn't even in the lead, and doesn't have WP:UNDUEWEIGHT placed on it. I don't see much of a problem.--Prisencolin (talk) 20:32, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Alright, I guess we can keep it. Volunteer Marek  02:01, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

References

FDA loophole?

There really either needs to be a link or explanation to what "exclusive rights" his company bought (referred to other's as a "loophole") since it is not clear that their should be any considering the patent expired on this drug long ago. I would do it myself but I just don't have any available time or access to a desktop atm. Nodekeeper (talk) 20:28, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

See this reddit thread here.Nodekeeper (talk) 20:48, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

There's a more difficult barrier explained here:

http://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2014/09/11/the_most_unconscionable_drug_price_hike_i_have_yet_seen

The Most Unconscionable Drug Price Hike I Have Yet Seen

By Derek Lowe

September 11, 2014

In the pipeline

Basically, in order to get a new generic drug approved, the manufacturer has to do a study with human subjects showing that the new generic is "substantially equivalent" to the current drug on the market. But Shkreli implemented a controlled distribution system, which allows the company to approve every sale of the drug, the purpose of which is to prevent a competitor from getting his drug for a study to demonstrate equivalence. This arrangement has gone to court a few times, as Lowe explains. --Nbauman (talk) 03:20, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Derek Lowe's blog

I disagree with a couple of user:Volunteer Marek's deletions.

First, and most important, Derek Lowe's blog is a well-known reliable source published by Science Transitional Medicine.

WP:NEWSBLOG "Several newspapers, magazines, and other news organizations host columns on their web sites that they call blogs. These may be acceptable sources if the writers are professionals, but use them with caution because the blog may not be subject to the news organization's normal fact-checking process."

This is particularly important because Lowe explains why the closed distribution system prevents generic competitors from getting FDA approval to manufacture or distribute competitive drugs.

Second, many WP:RSs have compared the price in the US with the price outside the US, and I think the BBC editorial is making an appropriate comparison. I can't find anything in WP:BLP to prevent editorials from being used in a BLP. If you can find it, please post the WP:BLP text here. --Nbauman (talk) 02:57, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

The problem with the comparison is that it lacks context; the US market and the UK market operate differently and the two are legally separated by the prohibition on drug imports. For example, the UK price, if I understand it correctly, is the price charged to patients. The US price set by Turning would be charged to insurance companies and hospitals. So it's sort of apples and oranges. This info is also not essential to the subject of this article.  Volunteer Marek  03:43, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

UK prescription prices for patients are a flat fee of £8.20 for almost all prescriptions, except those that are exempt from charge - cite: [NHS prescription fees]. Since the price quoted is greater than £8.20 per prescription, the BBC article must be talking about the cost to the NHS. WildCation (talk) 11:16, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Your opinions about the comparison are interesting. However, the BBC is a WP:RS, and many other WP:RSs have made that comparison. Multiple reporting by many WP:RSs establish WP:WEIGHT.

I think their argument is that if other countries can provide the same drugs cheaply, we should be able to do so too. The fact that the different markets operate differently is the point they're making. Almost every educated American knows that the UK and US have different systems. Their system gives them cheaper drugs.

But it doesn't matter what you or I think. What matters for WP purposes is that a lot of WP:RSs are making comparisons to other countries. I therefore believe that the price comparisons belong in the entry. If one of the WP:RSs discusses the context, include that.

Besides, you don't have a consensus to remove it. user:Petercascio and I both think it belongs. I'm sure other editors do too.

So do you agree? If not, what specific Wikipedia rules say it doesn't belong? A general reference to BLP isn't a reason. What do other people think? --Nbauman (talk) 16:12, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

"I think their argument is that if other countries can provide the same drugs cheaply, we should be able to do so too." - yes, but this is something that would belong in articles on the US and UK health care systems, not a biography of a single individual. As far as Mr. Shkreli's biography it;s tangential, since it's about the system not about him personally. Volunteer Marek  17:10, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

No, I disagree. The main, and possibly only, reason Shkreli is notable is that he bought up companies that owned the U.S. rights to drugs and raised their prices by an order of magnitude over what they used to be, and over what they are in other countries. Many WP:RSs cite the fact that he is charging much more for the drugs than other countries as evidence that the drugs are overpriced.

Do you agree that Shkreli is notable primarily for raising prices of drugs? Is there any other reason why he would be notable for Wikipedia? --Nbauman (talk) 18:52, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Heritage

His parents are Albanian and Croatian according to Bloomberg. The quoted source in the article links to an Albanian site quoting from Forbes, but there is no original Forbes link. https://web.archive.org/web/20150922183057/http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles/2014-04-17/retrophins-martin-shkreli-the-biotech-short-seller-who-went-long — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.77.168.25 (talk) 18:38, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Shkreli is an Albanian name. Evangeline (talk) 19:37, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

@Evangeline: Pamela Anderson has a Swedish name, yet qualifies as a "Canadian-American actress". Robert De Niro and Al Pacino have Italian names but qualify as "American actord". Barack Obama has a Kenyan surname but is referred to as an "American president". There exist limitless examples I can state to indicate the flow in your reasoning. Martin Shkreli was born in USA, is a full USA citizen and never held an Albanian citizenship. That is a necessary and sufficient criterion to qualify him as an "American entrepreneur". The "Albanian" qualification should be removed! 147.172.223.99 (talk) 10:43, 23 September 2015 (UTC)147.172.223.99 (talk) 10:42, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Agreed, and I've changed it back to "American" again. Kendall-K1 (talk) 01:34, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

I think you have mistaken your target in the reply to my comment, above. Note that I was just pointing out that his name is Albanian– which it is. Not that he was Albanian (which I didn't write here or in the article).

Shk- names are often Albanian. Evangeline (talk) 23:56, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Ethnicity

We have a source that says Shkreli is the son of Albanian and Croatian immigrants. Does that necessarily imply that his ethnicity is Albanian? Ethnic group says ethnicity is "a socially defined category of people who identify with each other based on common ancestral, social, cultural or national experience." I would expect we would need a source that says Shkreli identifies himself as Albanian. Kendall-K1 (talk) 20:56, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Agreed. Shkreli's ancestry is Albanian and Croatian, his ethnicity is American, which happens to be identical to his nationality. Removed from the infobox. IgnorantArmies (talk) 14:51, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Why wouldn't it imply that he is Albanian/Croatian? You don't have to self identity as an ethnicity to be labeled as such.--Prisencolin (talk) 07:52, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

I'd like to ask that all editors refrain from re-inserting this material until we have consensus on whether to include it. So far we only have one editor arguing for its inclusion. Kendall-K1 (talk) 12:31, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

The definition you cited for ethnic identity is based on a mainspace article, and not actual policy.--Prisencolin (talk) 00:01, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Good sources

This Forbes interview is a good source because the author actually had a long talk with Shkreli and explains Shkreli's justifications for his actions in Shkreli's own terms (which may not be convincing to a lot of people), and the author gives some of the best criticisms of Shkreli's practices, including the complaint that Shkreli didn't invent or develop anything. He also explains how it fits into the context of the drug business as a whole. He also explains why experts think Hillary Clinton's proposals won't work.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewherper/2015/09/24/my-lunch-with-shkreli-what-we-should-learn-from-pharmas-latest-monster/ My Lunch With Shkreli: What We Should Learn From Pharma's Latest Monster
Matthew Herper
Forbes
Sep 24, 2015

I also think this column by Derek Lowe is a good source, and I think it's an acceptable WP:RS. In particular, he explains the purpose of "closed distribution" and why generic companies can't simply sell competitive generic versions.

http://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2014/09/11/the_most_unconscionable_drug_price_hike_i_have_yet_seen The Most Unconscionable Drug Price Hike I Have Yet Seen
By Derek Lowe
September 11, 2014
In the pipeline
--Nbauman (talk) 03:10, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

I agree that the Forbes sources is good. I have some reservations about the blog. It'd probably be alright if this wasn't a BLP. Volunteer Marek  03:44, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Well I think Lowe's blog is a good source, user:Norvoid thinks it's a good source, a lot of other WP editors think it's a good source, and he's been quoted extensively in WP. My understanding of Lowe is that he's a strong supporter of the pharmaceutical industry and the free market system, and Science may have included him as a counterweight to all the criticisms of the pharmaceutical industry. But he's honest enough to criticize the industry and free market when it's not working as it should.

It is uncontested that when Shkreli was CEO of Retrophin he increased the price by 20-fold, isn't it? It's also true that many sources called it "Exhorbitant," "unconscionable" or worse, isn't it?

The reason I'm supporting Lowe's inclusion is that he's one of the more insightful sources. He's worked in the pharmaceutical industry, he understands the science, the business and the ethics. He distinguishes between OTOH developing drugs and making high profits, which he supports, and OTOH treating established, generic drugs as a financial play to make high profits without contributing anything to the development, which he doesn't support. Many WP:RSs have made the same argument, but Lowe is more knowledgeable and insightful, as I summarized in my earlier post.

So why specifically do you think it would violate WP rules to let this citation stay in the article, as I and Norvoid prefer? --Nbauman (talk) 16:42, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

If this wasn't a BLP I'd agree. But at the end of the day Lowe's blog, however insightful, is still an opinion piece which is why I'm hesitant to use it in a BLP. Volunteer Marek  16:48, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

You don't own this page, so what you personally are or aren't hesitant about is irrelevant. Consensus says that it's a valid reliable source. -- 184.189.217.91 (talk) 04:12, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Actually, WP:BLP trumps consensus. And who are you again?  Volunteer Marek  04:23, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

The consensus is that WP:BLP doesn't rule against this as a source. And I'm an editor just as you are ... duh. -- 184.189.217.91 (talk) 04:48, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

That's not how it works. And you know, there's a reason why BLPs are often protected from anon IP editing. Volunteer Marek  05:08, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

You're right, Volunteer Marek: according to WP:BLPSPS, we can't use that otherwise good source by Lowe in this BLP. Note that at the top of the article it says "An editorially independent blog...", and WP:BLPSPS says that blogs run by news organizations can be used only if "...the blog is subject to the newspaper's full editorial control." Norvoid (talk) 07:46, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

I think Lowe's blog would be acceptable under Statements of opinion (WP:RSOPINION):

Some sources may be considered reliable for statements as to their author's opinion, but not for statements asserted as fact without an inline qualifier like "(Author) says...". A prime example of this is opinion pieces in mainstream newspapers. When using them, it is better to explicitly attribute such material in the text to the author to make it clear to the reader that they are reading an opinion.

Note that otherwise reliable news sources—for example, the website of a major news organization—that publish in a "blog" style format for some or all of their content may be as reliable as if published in a more "traditional" 20th-century format.

Why does that not apply to Lowe's blog?

The disclaimer that Lowe's blog is an "editorially independent blog" is the equivalent of "Opinions are those of the authors, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of AAAS or Science magazine."

Lowe is also a published expert and authority in his own right Derek Lowe (chemist).

Since we don't all agree, we don't have a consensus that Lowe's blog violates WP:RS, even for purposes of WP:BLP.--Nbauman (talk) 19:39, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Because this is a BLP, I think we need a consensus for inclusion, not for exclusion. Lowe's blog is fine as a source for his own opinion. So we can't say "the price hike was unconscionable" but we could say "blogger Lowe has called the price hike unconscionable" if we decide he's an expert. Kendall-K1 (talk) 22:01, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

The important content that Lowe adds to the story is the explanation of the purpose of "closed distribution." If you read the comments section of almost any article about this, people are asking, "Why can't a generic manufacturer simply manufacture the drug in competition with Shkreli's company?" Lowe explained that "closed distribution" prevents this. This is clever and central to Shkreli's business strategy. You can't understand what's going on without answering this frequently-asked question. --Nbauman (talk) 04:17, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

You're right, that's an excellent point and should be made in the article. I can see several news articles making this point, e.g. [1], [2], and <ref name=NYTOvernight> (currently cited). Let's use those sources instead. Norvoid (talk) 06:33, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Additional Source for Martin Shkreli's Side

Right now there is one source for Martin Shkreli's explanation of why his actions are reasonable. (I'm not saying that his actions are reasonable, just that this interview has lots of candid quotes.) MedCity News link: http://medcitynews.com/2015/09/martin-shkreli-not-sorry/ or direct Youtube link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lystfat0Fp0 Martin Shkreli talks at length in this industry round table video. Cloveapple (talk) 05:49, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Not A Jew

http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/09/jewish-ceo-of-turing-pharmaceuticals-drives-up-price-of-medicine-for-big-profits/ http://www.f169bbs.com/bbs/news/171084-martin-shkreli-thankfully-not-a-jew http://politicalandsciencerhymes.blogspot.my/2015/09/send-albanian-hedge-fund-jew-martin.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jing345 (talk • contribs) 20:49, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Blogs and forum postings aren't WP:RS, particularly for use in a WP:BLP. Norvoid (talk) 05:43, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

You should be embarrassed that you consider these things legitimate sources. But in fact his old OKCupid profile indicated that he was a Christian: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:GVG2LKGucbcJ:www.okcupid.com/profile/martinshkreli+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=usThalia42 (talk) 19:22, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Which is hardly reliable either. People lie on dating profiles all the time. Jonathunder (talk) 19:25, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

I haven't heard of people lying about their religion (though of course they lie about their height & weight and so on). I agree that including that he's Christian would not be appropriate on the basis of a dating profile. But it's certainly stronger evidence of religion than blog posts by creepy anti-Semites.Thalia42 (talk) 19:03, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Out of patent Link

The "out of patent" portion is linked to a discussion of pharma patent controversies. Given that patents are actually not related to the price hike, this makes no sense. I removed the prior link to "chemical patents." If you want to link the word patent to pharma patents, I guess that could have relevance. But simply linking random words that are not really related to the issue seems more confusing than helpful.Thalia42 (talk) 19:19, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Unfortunately, pharmaceutical patent currently redirects to chemical patent. The significance of pharma patents certainly has relevance here, so I've linked Societal views on patents#Pharmaceutical patents instead. If there's a better article to link to for an explanation of the significance of patents for Shkreli's business model, please suggest away, but I can't see how the current link is confusing. Norvoid (talk) 11:09, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

I don't think pharma patents have relevance, actually, since this product is not in patent, and hasn't been for decades. I edited where it said originally "patented" product to say 'out of patent' but probably should've just removed the word "patent" entirely, for lack of relevance. Thalia42 (talk) 19:02, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Oddly, pharma patent is relevant here precisely because Daraprim is out of patent. Normally, pharma companies use patents and monopoly control of production, but Shkreli (and a few others) have found a means of obtaining closed distribution of medications to jack up the price through the roof, for meds which have a low acquisition cost because they're out of patent. Please refer to User:Nbauman's argument above (which got a bit sidetracked over a WP:RS debate), for more on the closed distribution issue. It's a new low in one of the dirtiest businesses on the planet, so it's worth making that clear in the article. Nobody has written yet in the article about the point Nbauman raised two weeks ago about closed distribution, so maybe I'll have a bash at it. Norvoid (talk) 13:59, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Do add it if you can. I just think that relevance as "not relevant" which is what you're arguing, is not encyclopedic. You're saying "here is a controversy... which is entirely irrelevant to our article." Thalia42 (talk) 20:56, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Regarding the bit about Bernie Sanders

Shkreli just tried to donate to the campaign in an apparent effort to get the dogs off his back, and Sanders rejected the donation in favor of giving it to a public health clinic instead. http://theweek.com/speedreads/583578/bernie-sanders-rejects-donation-from-ceo-who-raised-drug-price-5000-percent — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:2000:DDB5:8200:4155:D5D7:DD68:56BA (talk) 14:47, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

In an interview with national publication, Stat News, on Thursday, October 15, 2015, "Shkreli confirmed that he’d donated $2,700 to the Sanders campaign — the maximum individual contribution — on Sept. 28. At the time, the campaign sent the Turing CEO a form e-mail" ; thanking him for the donation. At the time of the interview, "campaign spokesman Michael Briggs said Sanders won’t keep the money. Instead, the campaign will make a $2,700 donation to the Whitman-Walker health clinic in Washington." "Shkreli made the contribution, he said, partly because he supports some of Sanders’ proposals — just not the ones about drug prices. But mainly, he said, he donated to get the senator’s attention in the hopes that he could get a private meeting to explain why drug companies set prices the way they do." Sen. Sanders did not accommodate him. (42) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anael52 (talk • contribs) 19:33, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Overlinking

@Jonathunder: Guidelines say to avoid: "The names of major geographic features and locations, languages, and religions". "Americans" is a demographic group, individuals may be interested in the particular composition of such groups.--Prisencolin (talk) 00:32, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Mis-emphasis of lede

Half the lede covers a single business decision by a single business entity through which this individual works. This is blog-style rather than encyclopedic writing. So, I will place a tag, to call fpr regular article contributors to move the quotation and other mis-focused content into the main body, and create further article content-summarizing text into the lede—so that the lede functions per WP policy and guidelines, as a summary of the whole of the article (and since BLP, accurately reflects not a passing controversy, but the overarching role of the individual in business, etc.). Le Prof 165.20.114.246 (talk) 18:21, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

While it can be re-worded, the fact of the matter is that is what he is most notable for. He was not a notable hedge fund manager or a CEO until this story. There has been a significantly sharp increase in his notability due to this and the lede should reflect that to some extant, not whitewash it entirely. JesseRafe (talk) 19:22, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Agree with JesseRafe. Before Turing's price hike on Daraprim, Shkreli was notable and known within the world of finance, but his general notability with the public at large and in reliable sources now stems from his management/marketing/pricing of Daraprim (and maybe for some of his other business/hedgefund practices). I disagree that Shkreli's association with Turing's pricing of Daraprim is that of a passing controversy - Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that reflects what information is available within reliable sources, and reliable sources are always including the information on Turing/Daraprim/price-hike/drug-pricing controversy/Most Hated Man in America/etc. Shearonink (talk) 18:08, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Something is wrong with the cite journal dates...

When I was just editing this article, the following warning popped up:

Warning: Martin Shkreli is calling Template:Cite journal with more than one value for the "date" parameter. Only the last value provided will be used.

There are over 30 'cite journal' references in the article. I went through the first half or so, trying to tease out where this issue was occurring and found one errant date but was unsuccessful in finding any others. Shearonink (talk) 16:40, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 December 2015

Under the Retrophin heading, Shkreli is referred to as "Shkrel" (missing the final "i"). This should be changed to fix the typo. Amklose (talk) 06:07, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Fixed. Thank you! JesseRafe (talk) 22:25, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 December 2015

In the line below:

"drew the attention of the Securities and Exchange Commission, which investigated Shrkeli's knowledge "

the name "Shkreli" is misspelled Betatype (talk) 19:14, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Done -- ferret (talk) 19:26, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

High school?

He graduated from Hunter in 2001 not 2000. The Daily News article is wrong. I request correction — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michaelrherman (talk • contribs) 21:47, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

No, he dropped out in his senior year ;) : http://money.cnn.com/2015/09/22/investing/aids-drug-martin-shkreli-750-cancer-drug/index.html?category=home http://www.bloomberg.com/features/2015-martin-shkreli-securities-fraud/?terminal=true http://time.com/4153512/martin-shkreli-pharmaceuticals-arrested-turing-daraprim/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.113.154.31 (talk) 00:43, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Birth date

Listed as April 1st, as well as April 2nd, when his actual birth date is March 17th. See "About" section on his chess.com member page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zaostao (talk • contribs) 03:39, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 18 December 2015

A sentence in the "Price hike controversy" section is scrambled, with two candidates' names split off into their own sentence.

The following passage:

The price increase was initially criticized, jointly, by the Infectious Diseases Society of America and the HIV Medicine Association,[28][34] by the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America,[36] and soon thereafter by political candidates Hillary Clinton,[37] with reference now being made to the story going viral.[6] Bernie Sanders,[38] and Donald Trump.[39]

Should be:

The price increase was initially criticized, jointly, by the Infectious Diseases Society of America and the HIV Medicine Association,[28][34] by the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America,[36] and soon thereafter by political candidates Hillary Clinton,[37], Bernie Sanders,[38] and Donald Trump,[39] with reference now being made to the story going viral.[6]

Deionized (talk) 03:46, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Done /wia🎄/tlk 03:53, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

minor error in lead , and article text

Just a tiny correction - the Daraprim price increase from $13.50 to $750 is (only) a 5455% increase (someone forgot to subtract 100% from the quotient to compute an increase percentage ?) .

Whether the erronenous figure was quoted from the title of ref.28 or not does not excuse wikipedia editors from exaggerating the "offense" (of raising the cost of the generic drug) in its own statements .

The same 5,500% figure also appears in the section Price hike controversy .

Many news sources said 5000% (or over 5000%) . Perhaps that is enough ? Ex :
http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/health/drug-company-raises-parasite-pill-price-13-50-750-article-1.2369311

mmw220 at yahoo 70.106.146.205 (talk) 16:58, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Why do we use percentage at all? The exact prices are already mentioned, so it isn’t strictly necessary. Moreover, why not just say “approximately 55x” instead of the, arguably, much more impressive percentage of 5500%? I’m asking myself whether this is really WP:NPOV.–Totie (talk) 14:25, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

The percent needs to be changed to 5456% because 5556% is incorrect!

Questionable value of a sentence

It is in the Esports and music section "When Shkreli was arraigned in December and released on bail, he continued streaming from his apartment". It is not clear to me what value this sentence is adding to Shkreli's article. Can someone help me understand? thank youBoilingorangejuice (talk) 04:49, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Turing Founding Date

The section on Turing claims it was founded in February 2015. I do not know when Turing was founded, but am certain it was before February 2015 since Retrophin announced the transfer of certain assets to Turing on October 14, 2014 ( http://ir.retrophin.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=875993 ). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cowsandmilk (talk • contribs) 02:13, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Birthdate edit request

Change birthdate from April 1st, to March 17th. See this tweet from Martin's verified twitter account stating that 3/18/14 is one day after his 31st birthday (https://twitter.com/MartinShkreli/status/439390955964493824), and see this tweet of him replying to someone who said "Happy belated birthday" on the 19th of March. (https://twitter.com/MartinShkreli/status/446273988780904448)

I'm not sure how to cite, so I just put the references in parentheses, sorry.

Zaostao (talk) 22:47, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

We don't normally use Twitter as a source. People say all kinds of things on social media. Jonathunder (talk) 23:02, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

I agree. Twitter or any social media is not an acceptable source for this article. Boilingorangejuice (talk) 11:39, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

This article made the Top 25 Report

This article was the seventh most popular on Wikipedia according to the Top 25 Report with 772,581 views for the week December 13 to 19, 2015. Shkreli was arrested December 17. Congratulations to the editors of this article for the exposure of their work.  SchreiberBike | ⌨  18:27, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

This is an inappropriate use of the talk page. The function of this page is to improve the article not j*rk ourselves off. Please refrain from non-constructive comments like this in the future. thank you Boilingorangejuice (talk) 11:37, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Please see discussion I've started at Wikipedia talk:Top 25 Report#Negative feedback on talk page notice. Thank you.  SchreiberBike | ⌨  20:45, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Image

How on Earth is File:MartinShkreli.png CC 4.0? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:43, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Never mind. I've speedy tagged the image and removed it from the article. Almost certainly a copyvio. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:43, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Birthdate edit request no. 3

I am 100% sure his birth date is the 17th of March, NOT APRIL 1ST, so I dm'd him on twitter and he replied in capitals for emphasis that "IT IS MARCH 17", i'm really not sure what else he or I can do to have this error fixed other than him releasing his birth certificate. The current references do not list where they sourced their information from and I have scoured the internet looking for proof of the April 1st claim so that I can sleep easy at night BUT TO NO AVAIL, as his birth date IS MARCH 17, not April 1.

Here is a screencap of his reply to my DM on twitter and a screencap showing that this is his verified twitter account respectively.

https://gyazo.com/f8d8004898ff537b419f1140d5f5708f

https://gyazo.com/75b31cbc437dcfa01fd6706421285d4a

Zaostao (talk) 20:57, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

And here is my reply to your question about this on my Talk page:

@Zaostao: You may be persuaded, but I am not. Shkreli's profile on chess.com is self-prepared, so by its very character is not reliable. I can't say why he would want to use a false birthdate there, but Shkreli hasn't impressed me to date as a model of sound judgment and honesty, and I can think of a few reasons he might want to avoid maintaining a consistent public identity. The Vanity Fair citation is highly reliable, and the magazine employs fact-checkers, so the information will have been vetted. Unless you can find and cite some other, not self-published and reliable source that supports a change in his birthdate, please leave it as it is. General Ization ^Talk 20:55, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Please leave it alone. It's time to say that if you continue to bring this issue up again and again on this Talk page after it has already been addressed, it will be regarded as tendentious editing. General Ization ^Talk 21:04, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Regarding the dispute over whether he was born in March or April of 1983: it's really not important. Let's just put the year and leave it at that. Jonathunder (talk) 01:03, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

How about "Spring 1983" in that case for an intermediate amount of specificity?--Prisencolin (talk) 04:58, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

We have a highly reliable source that says April 1, 1983, and that birthdate remains in other parts of the article. I have no interest in arguing the point further (think it was thoroughly made here and on my Talk page), but it seems silly to me to specify a season as the subject's birthdate because someone has questioned it on the basis of a clearly unreliable source. General Ization ^Talk 05:39, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 January 2016

Federal Criminal Indictment

On December 14, 2015, a federal grand jury in Eastern District of New York returned a seven-count indictment against Shkreli and Evan Greebel, an attorney and partner at the law firm of Kaye Scholer.

S.E.C. Complaint

On December 17, 2015, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission in the Eastern District of New York returned a complaint against Shkreli, Evan Greebel, the attorney and partner at the law firm of Kaye Scholer, MSMB Capital Management LLC, and MSMB Healthcare Management LLC.

66.99.2.79 (talk) 18:46, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, that information already appears to be within the article, see Arrest. Shearonink (talk) 21:17, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 January 2016: didn't graduate from Hunter

Can you please edit the high school sentence(s) to remove that he graduated from Hunter (because he did not). Source:

• " It has been reported that he graduated two years ahead of schedule from New York’s Hunter College High School, a public school for intellectually gifted kids. But according to a spokesperson for the school, he attended but did not graduate. He went on to get his bachelor’s in business administration from Baruch College in 2005." http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2015/12/martin-shkreli-pharmaceuticals-ceo-interview

Also please delete "Either way, he graduated in 2000" as it is unverifiable.

And the Vanity Fair source says he graduated from college in 2005, not 2004 so please change "He went on to receive a bachelor's degree in business administration from New York's Baruch College in 2004"

to

"He went on to receive a bachelor's degree in business administration from New York's Baruch College in 2005"

Thank you. 64.134.64.190 (talk) 23:44, 22 January 2016 (UTC) 64.134.64.190 (talk) 23:39, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Looks like similar changes are already done: the article says there are conflicting sources about Hunter graduation, and that he graduated college in 2005. RudolfRed (talk) 03:55, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

High school reference

Since there is conflicting sources about Shkreli's high school graduation, would his word work as a source? He streams everyday and could answer the question.Thehack771 (talk) 16:27, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Typo "delistng"

There is a typo in the following sentence: "This followed NASDAQ delistng its shares, and the resignation of two directors." It should be "delisting."

Sbwells (talk) 22:10, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up! JesseRafe (talk) 22:37, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Martin Shkreli Interview at The Breakfast Club Power 105.1 (02/03/2016)

Since he was pleading the 5th to congress, I think this video is interesting where he discusses both the album and the price increase [3]; perhaps it can be of use to the editors of this article--K.Nevelsteen (talk) 04:25, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 February 2016

In the education section, a hyperlink "Hunter College" directs to Hunter College (university) and not Hunter College High School (secondary school attended by Shkreli. 170.212.0.60 (talk) 14:28, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

 Done Thanks for pointing that out - Arjayay (talk) 15:07, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

I don't have time to do this properly right now, but I noticed...rather curiously, really...his Personal Life section has a rather conspicuous absence of his political affiliation. I presume he's a Democrat given his donation history, but we objectively know he has donated $2700 to Bernie Sanders and $33,500 to the Democrat Senatorial Campaign Committee. I think this is relevant news, don't you?

Here are two links confirming this information. I'd update the article myself if it wasn't protected.

http://money.cnn.com/2015/10/16/news/companies/sanders-drug-ceo-shkreli-donation/?iid=EL

https://progressivemidwesterner.wordpress.com/2015/09/22/democratic-senatorial-campaign-commitee-took-33400-from-big-pharmas-big-jerk-martin-shkreli/

Madbowler6 (talk) 02:10, 12 February 2016 (UTC)madbowler6 Feb 11, 2016

Semi-protected edit request on 28 February 2016

The line "Shkreli received a phone call from the FBI on the day of his arrest live while streaming" cites http://www.businessinsider.com/martin-shkreli-hung-up-fbi-agent-live-on-video-before-his-arrest-2015-12, which does not support the statement. The article only states that he "may have" received a call from the FBI, but that it may have been a prank. (Original research, in fact, suggests that the message was the beginning of a standard pre-recorded prank call.)

The line should be removed. If for some reason it is deemed desirable to keep it in the article, it should at least be updated to reflect the uncertainty of the source, e.g. "Shkreli may have received a phone call from the FBI on the day of his arrest live while streaming." 74.46.23.62 (talk) 01:55, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

 Done Line removed. General Ization ^Talk 02:22, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Theft of 15 million in bitcoins not true

He later revealed on his Twitter account that he had completed the transaction and had payed in bitcoin. Later that day, it was revealed by Shkreli that he had not actually received the album, and was actually scammed of the $15 million by someone named Daquan who "said he was Kanye's boy"[108] It says this and links the source as his twitter. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XOJVXc8qVgE In this video he talks about how he was trolling the media. Daquan is a meme. http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/daquan — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.104.217.198 (talk) 09:39, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 February 2016

The selection in personal life needs to be removes about Shkreli's twitter posts of how he offered Kanye 15 million for his album and was scammed. sources are article 1 article 2Him himself (sorry for trashy video) admitting to trolling. GloryCow (talk) 04:31, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 00:36, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 March 2016

Please change the font size of "Price hike controversy" from 10.5 pt font to 14 pt font, as 14 pt font is the size used by all other subheadings in that section.

 Not done that is clearly a sub-section of Turing Pharmaceuticals - Arjayay (talk) 22:40, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Shkreli didn't offer 1,2 million for Team NME (League of Legends)

According to this AMA by Chris Badawi, Shkreli didn't make any offer for team NME

https://www.reddit.com/r/leagueoflegends/comments/4uxv6y/hello_im_chris_badawi_uber_twice_banned_esports/d5tszj7

I would appreciate if someone could edit the "Other projects" section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 179.56.128.14 (talk) 19:23, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Major security upgrade needed

Too much vandalism on this page. I've been working for a while now to remove it all and I've finally got the article restored to a respectable state. Can we have it locked down now, please? I don't have the clearance to do so but it is clearly needed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jade Phoenix Pence (talk • contribs) 21:35, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

Derek Lowe...?

In adding the Thiola price hike to the Retrophin chronology I quoted and linked to Derek Lowe's "most unconscionable" article. Then I looked through the Talk section and saw in the archives that there was contention over whether his opinion pieces should be included, but couldn't determine the consensus. I don't see any Lowe content currently in the article, so should this addition be deleted? Fishlandia (talk) 19:18, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

He's an entrepreneur?...

I don't know where i'm supposed to put this topic, but how the hell is he considered an "entrepreneur" again? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.180.28.224 (talk) 21:40, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Sources refer to Mr. Shkreli as such, see Reference #30. Shearonink (talk) 21:59, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

That's an old article written by a blogger before he came to light for what he was doing and where few knew how he operated or what he was doing which many now would consider to be unethical price gouging, not "entrepreneurship". This is a ridiculous adjective to apply to this person. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.180.28.224 (talk) 02:43, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Seriously, if the vast current majority opinion of experts and people is that this guy is not an entrepreneur, change the sentence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.180.28.224 (talk) 19:01, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

By the definition of entrepreneurship available here on Wikipedia, yes, he's an entrepreneur. I suspect you're confusing the term with inventor or some other term that implies some sense of innovation. Innovation is not required of entrepreneurs; only that they see an opportunity for profit and organize one or more companies to take advantage of it, which is exactly what Shkreli is known for. General Ization ^Talk 19:13, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

See also wikt:entrepreneur. General Ization ^Talk 19:34, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Term used to describe this article's subject is now sourced from multiple reliable sources. Shearonink (talk) 19:42, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

That definition is so vague it would include anyone that is a small business owner. And according to that exact article you just sent it says exactly "First used in 1723, today the term entrepreneur implies qualities of leadership, initiative, and innovation in new venture design." My point is entrepreneur usually implies some kind of positive innovation, not price gouging. It is not an innovation to do nothing to increase the quality of a product while severely diminishing the supply of that product in the market. And currently he is not a pharmaceutical executive, he is unemployed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.180.28.224 (talk) 19:47, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

See above. Neither innovation nor ethical behavior are required attributes of entrepreneurs. And indeed, anyone who establishes a small business and assumes some risk by doing so is an entrepreneur. The fact that you attach a positive ethos to the term doesn't change its meaning. It is not, by definition, a compliment; it is simply a description of someone's approach to making money. We obviously encourage "positive" entrepreneurism in our society, but there have always been and will always be both "positive" (i.e., ethical) and "negative" entrepreneurs. General Ization ^Talk 19:50, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Agree to disagree. I would argue the vast majority of people would imply a positive connotation to the word entrepreneur and they would not apply it to Shkreli with what we now know. And currently he is not a pharmaceutical executive anywhere, this should say former pharmaceutical executive. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.180.28.224 (talk) 20:15, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

You can argue it all you want, but unless you can provide a cited source that supports that argument, he remains an entrepreneur here. As to your second point, Lee Iacocca is still described as an "American automobile executive", not a former one, even though (at 91) he has been "unemployed" for some years. We generally allow notable corporate executives to retain that distinction when it is the primary basis for their notability. Like him or not, Shkreli is a highly notable pharma executive. General Ization ^Talk 20:19, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

K. I think I will use the same source originally cited to me. http://www.forbes.com/sites/chrisversace/2016/02/05/call-martin-shkreli-whatever-you-want-but-not-a-pharma-ceo/#5a0ece1879fe — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.180.28.224 (talk) 20:32, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict)User: 69.180.28.224 - Regardless of what the title of the Forbes article is ("Call Martin Shkreli Whatever You Want, But Not A Pharma CEO"), the source you cite above describes Mr Shkreli in the caption of the article's photo as an entrepreneur...and as a pharmaceutical executive. "Entrepreneur and pharmaceutical executive Martin Shkreli (L) on Capitol Hill..." Shearonink (talk) 21:29, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

P.S. Should I go change Charles Ponzi to correctly say "entrepreneur" as well? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.180.28.224 (talk) 21:04, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

As a Wikipedia editor, when you see an article attributed to a "contributor", you should instantly recognize it as what it is, an OpEd piece, and hence not suitable for use as a cited source for anything without inline attribution as the opinion of the author. It is simply Mr. Versace's opinion. In any case, it does nothing to support your contention that "the vast majority of people would imply a positive connotation to the word entrepreneur and they would not apply it to Shkreli", only that one contributing writer for Forbes believes that he should not be called a "Pharma CEO". As for Charles Ponzi, his having set up an investment company, albeit a fraudulent one, in order to profit from a perceived opportunity, and having assumed the risk of doing so, means that yes, technically, he was an entrepreneur. This is not the Talk page for that article, so you may want to discuss the idea with the editors there (assuming you can find multiple reliable sources that describe Ponzi as such, as we have done here concerning Shkreli). General Ization ^Talk 22:23, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

By the way, in terms of sheer time-wasting, this discussion ranks right up there with the debate about whether Donald Trump should be called a politician. General Ization ^Talk 22:31, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

FASCINATING. agree to disagree. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.180.28.224 (talk) 00:01, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

4chan offer.

So, as some of you might have heard, Martin Shkreli wants to buy the imageboard 4chan from its current owner to "save" it. Should that be included in the article? 83.83.177.113 (talk) 17:24, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Possibly, if you can provide reliable sources for verification. Meatsgains (talk) 19:05, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Securities fraud

I'm confused. Did the securities fraud charge just quietly go away? The last legal development mentioned in this article is of his retention of a defense counsel in this matter a year ago now. Anything since? Discovery disputes? Public information re: settlement talks? Anything? --Christofurio (talk) 14:35, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

adding a word and hyphens

I just wanted to fix some grammatical mistakes. Paragraph 1, Line 1 "He is co-founder" should be "He is the co-founder" Paragraph 5, Line 1 (Line 10 overall) "then 32 year old Shkreli's" should be "then 32-year-old Shkreli's" Fawxplus (talk) 02:08, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Done — Train2104 (t • c) 03:09, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Capitalization: "The Most Hated Man" vs "the most hated man"

Launching discussion here in the proper place. Please submit arguments below. J^♯m (talk | contribs) 18:57, 16 February 2017 (UTC) Also, if you dispute whether the title of "T/the M/most H/hated M/man" should be included in the article or not, please feel free to voice that opinion as well. J^♯m (talk | contribs) 19:01, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

It's really quite simple. "The most hated man [in America, etc.]" is simply a descriptive phrase, albeit one used as an epithet; it is not an honorary (or even dis-honorary) title or award that is officially bestowed upon anyone. Neither of the recently cited sources for this claim, Fortune and the BBC, have capitalized the phrase in making the assertion, and I trust their knowledge and appropriate use of the English language far more than I do that of the editor who persistently asserted that the phrase should be capitalized. General Ization ^Talk 19:09, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

I have to agree. You may note that calling Martin Shkreli now has five six references to it. I'll research in a sec and get back to you on the capitalization thing, but I suspect you're right. In any case, people were attempting to remove that language from the article. I think that would be inappropriate; whether or not he actually is the most hated man in America, <joke> or whether Donald Trump is giving him a run for his money, </joke> the fact that Shkreli is being consistently referred to by that title label ought to be noncontroversial. J^♯m (talk | contribs) 19:46, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

• BBC: 'the most hated man in America', right in the title headline
• NYP: 'The most hated man in America', also in the title headline
• WaPo: 'the most hated man in America', also in title headline
• Everything-PR: The "Most Hated Man in America", in title headline. Phrase not used elsewhere in article.
• Fortune: "The Most Hated Man in America" in title headline, but "the 'most hated man in America'" in the body of the article.
• Telegraph: "American's[sic] most hated man', also in title headline.

Seems the only reference I can find that doesn't does capitalize the epithet is also the only reference that doesn't actually use the phrase in the body of the text. So, I Suppose The Lesson Is That You Capitalize Almost Every Word in a Title, Honorific, or Headline, but that you only capitalize proper nouns elsewhere. J^♯m (talk | contribs) 19:54, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Did you mean "the only reference I can find that doesn't capitalize the epithet", or the opposite (what I suspect)? General Ization ^Talk 22:43, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time and trouble. I'll just observe that some of the confusion (at least mine) among editors discussing this issue is the ambiguous use of the term title; I gather you're using the term (as I do) to refer to the headlines of the articles you've cited (which also serve as the articles' "titles"), not to a "title" in the sense of an honorific. The title field in the citation should follow the capitalization of the source in all cases, whether capitalized or not. General Ization ^Talk 20:03, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

I've used some <ins>underline</ins> and <del>strikethrough</del> tags to do some correcting on the text I had written. This should make it a little more clear. Sidenote for any people for whom English may not be a first language: "honorific," "label", "epithet", and "title" can all be synonyms for what you call a person. "Headline" and "title" are synonyms for the name of an article. J^♯m (talk | contribs) 17:21, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Also, I do agree that the title field should absolutely follow the capitalization of the source. I trust that any edits I have made do reflect this. I don't know because I actually let Wikipedia build the citations for me. I was amazed by how easy it was to build a citation that way! J^♯m (talk | contribs) 17:24, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for opening this discussion and your research. Based on your findings, I've again de-capitalized the phrase "the most hated man in America" in the article. General Ization ^Talk 16:07, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

"Despite his opposition to Donald Trump's candidacy"???

First sentence in the 2017 section

I'm wondering if this is even worth mentioning since his support (or lack of) for Trump seems disputed. He defended Trump's "grab her by the pussy" comment on Twitter and said he would vote for him over Hillary. To say that he was opposed to his candidacy paints the picture that Shkreli didn't have any support for Trump at all. Luka0188 (talk) 04:32, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Vandalism/Biased Tweaks

There has been a slew of vandalism by the user Backendgaming (possibly the subject himself), which include claiming he's a philanthropist and changing his category from American chief executive to American art collector, as well as mass deletion of parts of the article. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Martin_Shkreli&type=revision&diff=770558203&oldid=769378526 Johnny "ThunderPeel2001" Walker (talk) 10:00, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Trump's inauguration attendance

"Despite his opposition to Donald Trump's candidacy, Shkreli was invited to attend Trump's inauguration on January 20, 2017, which he did.[129][130]"

The sources doesn't verify that he actually attended the inauguration. Shkreli's search for a date to inauguration is likely satire as he is an admitted fan of satire. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.184.24.185 (talk) 22:44, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Net worth incorrect

The net worth section incorrectly states $4m - which is the decline in value of one of Mr. Shkreli's accounts - not his entire net worth. Including only one account misses the value of his private equity, public equity, art and other holdings. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Martinshkreli (talk • contribs) 00:00, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Did not graduate from Hunter College High School

According to the NY Times he stopped attending classes and was asked to leave, so he is not a "graduate of" Hunter. http://money.cnn.com/2015/09/22/investing/aids-drug-martin-shkreli-750-cancer-drug/

References

Also, the current version cites his own words to say he left due to "lack of interest." This isn't true (per the above ref) - he was kicked out. --Aquillion (talk) 21:59, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 May 2017

Change "from the platform." to "from Twitter." in the "Twitter Controversy" subsection, because it's not unambigous. It could mean Facebook or Twitter. 95.91.245.188 (talk) 15:27, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

• Done Copy edit only. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 02:21, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 June 2017

His new twitter is BLMBro. 2601:184:4980:89D8:7C47:F7E3:2FC4:1CA (talk) 01:36, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Cannolis (talk) 04:41, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

"Brilliant beyond words"

Does anyone else feel that the use of "brilliant beyond words" in the lead of the article is a bit misleading/biased given that in the referenced source it is defense attorney making the claim? I'd say either a note should be added or the sentence rewritten to qualify/clarify. HidyHoTim (talk) 23:51, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

These are good points HidyHoTim and they crossed my mind when I added the section, but it has not only been his attorney who has commented on his genius, even his disgruntled ex-investors couldn't help point out his high intelligence (as well as many others), so his attorney's comments are not necessarily biased they are just the expression of an opinion from a credible source like those other opinions expressed by the media and commentators. It seems important to add balance to the article and there is no evidence to be found that he is not technically a genius (no source has suggested otherwise). Cypresscross (talk) 01:18, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

• I modified it to say "his defense attorney" rather than "others". The latter implies multiple people, which it isn't, and further implies some general acceptance. --Hammersoft (talk) 02:10, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
• I removed it. This is a fundamentally non-neutral statement from someone who is paid to paint a pretty picture of him. The full quote provides a very different picture than this one cherry-picked quote taken out of all context, also. "Will you find him weird? Yes. But Martin Shkreli, despite all his flaws and dysfunctional personality, is brilliant beyond words." Leaving out the full picture and only including the most flattering part is puffery. If, and this is a big if, reliable independent sources comment on his intelligence, this could be considered based on that context. Grayfell (talk) 05:56, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
• Journalists are not necessarily neutral and are also paid and therefore not independent. The other quotes such as "most hated man in America" for example cite no studies when making this claim, and it is unknown how the population of America really feels about Shkreli. There is broad consensus across many articles and sources regarding his high intelligence, in fact it was part of the title of the reference used. I will try a variation on the text. Cypresscross (talk) 11:11, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
• That completely misrepresents WP:RS. Journalists from reputable outlets are assumed to be reliable, and without any reason to the contrary, they are assumed to be independent of the subject they report on. Grayfell (talk) 19:44, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
• I disagree with the changes being reverted and thought the last version of the text here was balanced and well cited - if the above comment is correct that "Journalists from reputable outlets are assumed to be reliable, and without any reason to the contrary, they are assumed to be independent of the subject they report on" then the changes added to the lead which were from a journalist at reputable outlet, should have stayed - but certainly invite more feedback from more editors on the subject.Cypresscross (talk) 20:58, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

You're very far off the mark here. The changes you made are unacceptable for multiple reasons. For one, it's extremely vague. Who, exactly, is raising these questions? For another, it's strongly implying that being a genius is somehow relevant to his unpopularity or criminality. Nobody is saying that he's unintelligent, nor is that the reason he's hated. Setting this up as though "con man" and "simply brilliant" are somehow opposed to each other is misleading and inappropriate. Additionally, this isn't what the Guardian, as a newspaper, was saying. It was reporting presentations made at his trial. This context is necessary for understanding the source. This is not the Guardian stating this as its own perspective. The way you included this was downright deceptive. Grayfell (talk) 21:10, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Completely inappropriate to refer to my edit as "deceptive", particularly when you have been following me around WP for months undoing my edits in violation of WP guidelines... an issue you have already been warned on, and which you agreed to stop Cypresscross (talk) 21:33, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Wow. When did you stop beating your wife? I absolutely do not accept your characterization of my behavior, but this isn't the place to discuss it. Your edit was deceptive, as it blatantly misrepresented the attached source by sampling from the opening lines while totally ignoring the substance of the source. Zero nuance or context here. Only puffery and false balance. Grayfell (talk) 21:42, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

The Guardian clearly did not wonder on its own behalf whether Shkreli is or was a "nerdy genius"; that was not an editorial piece, nor expression of a widely-held opinion. They were referring directly to his attorney's characterization of his client. Citing both the Guardian and the attorney with regard to that one citation is basically double-dipping, and indeed deceptive. General Ization ^Talk 22:15, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

@Cypresscross: You need to address this issue. You added the content and it has been challenged by multiple people. The burden is on you to get consensus. Grayfell (talk) 05:02, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

@General Ization: This is a good faith edit that adds badly needed balance. His high intelligence / genius is widely held, according even to his purported victims (see comment above). The opening sentence of the article poses the question in the edit "Martin Shkreli is either a con man who scammed hedge fund investors out of millions or a nerdy genius who made them even richer." That is a reliable secondary source posing a legitimate question, if anything the reporter shows a negative bias by adding "nerdy" to the defense counsels quote (a word he never used). Further to your point the Gaurdian clearly also did not wonder on its own behalf whether Shkreli is or was a "con man"; They were referring directly to the prosecution's characterization of him (who have a vested interest in winning the trial - they are paid to prosecute just as Shkreli's attorney is paid to defend). The prosecution called him a "con man" and his defense lawyer called him a "genius", these are two opposing views in a debate - both sides arguably may have a bias, or may be expressing honestly held beliefs - there is no deception in the edit. However, the edit may be able to be improved. Cypresscross (talk) 10:20, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

The Guardian article also summarizes a key point: Shkreli made his investors richer. I have reworked the text to improve it. Cypresscross (talk) 10:36, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

The reworked quote from the Guardian addresses my objection in that it correctly attributes both characterizations to the respective attorneys rather than to the newspaper or its reporter. General Ization ^Talk 11:45, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 July 2017

In section "Early Life", add to the sentence X " Shkreli was born in Coney Island Hospital, Brooklyn. He is the son of Albanian and Croatian immigrants who worked as janitors" that Y "Shkreli's father is from the Malesi e Madhe region in Northern Albania, and his ancestry goes back to the Shkreli clan." Ervinsenaj (talk) 17:24, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Shearonink (talk) 17:36, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 July 2017

Resolved

Request: In section 2.3.1 change

"Imprimis is now offering its compounded, orally taken formulations of pyrimethamine and leucovorin beginning at US$99 for a 100‑count bottle, essentially a dollar a dose."

to

"Imprimis is now offering its compounded, orally taken formulations of pyrimethamine and leucovorin beginning at US$99 for a 100‑count bottle(US$0.99 per dose)."

Rational: Minor copy edit. It is more accurate to say 99/100 (literally) equals 0.99 vs is "[figuratively] essentially [1]" 192.0.144.58 (talk) 03:11, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

 Not done You have missed the point. "essentially a dollar a dose" expresses the fact that Imprimis CEO Mark Baum made good on his October 2015 commitment, described earlier in the article, to offer the drugs for a dollar per pill. The technical distinction between $0.99 and $1.00 is unimportant, and the article is fine without your proposed change. General Ization ^Talk 03:18, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Also, please do not alter your signature; it is intended to identify you, and it does not do so if you change it to something meaningless after the fact. General Ization ^Talk 03:19, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

@General Ization: I didn't miss the point; in fact I completely understood that, not only was the dollar a pill goal met, it could technically be considered surpassed (discounting taxes, etc).

made good AND even maybe surpassed 0.99<=1

That is exactly why I though it was ignorant when I read 0.99 is "essentially" 1. The truth (arithrmetic, no source needed) is 0.99 is "essentially" a little less than 1; exactly 0.01 less than 1.

Pi is *not* "essetially" 22 sevenths, and biographic articals *can* be precise with numbers.

Also, @General Ization:, fyi, yes, one's signature is used to identify, but as an unregistered Wikipedia editor I edit from several up addresses. In order to avoid confusion, I will usually edit my signature when engaging in a conversation with other editors (e.g. on a talk page) so to identify my self as a single voice by signing the same unique identifier even if I access from different ips. Since I'm on the same VPN ip now, I will just ~autosign this time, but if I use a new ip in the future to continue to contribute to this conversation I will resign my previous messages so to identify unambiguously.

N.B. I concur that the article is "fine" without this edit but I believe it would be (albeit slightly) better with this edit.

192.0.144.58 (talk) 04:01, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. Grayfell (talk) 04:18, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

@Grayfell: Would you care to offer a third opinion? 192.0.144.58 (talk) 04:29, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

One preceding paragraph mentions "$1-a-pill" while another mentions "drugs for one dollar". This is in contrast to a pill that went from $13.50 to $750 per pill overnight. The reason this is being mentioned (the "essence" in "essentially") is because of this context. With this in mind, the current wording seems sufficient. The headline of the attached source also supports this: "Competitor to Offer $1 Pill After Turing Price Hike Outrage". Grayfell (talk) 04:47, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

@Grayfell Thanks! I marked resolved. 192.0.144.58 (talk) 04:55, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Glad I could help. Grayfell (talk) 05:01, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Chairman of The National Albanian-American Council (NAAC) Martin Shkreli is not this Martin Shkreli...

I am trying to find more photos and a better source but it does seem very clear to me that "Chairman of The National Albanian-American Council (NAAC) Martin Shkreli" and the "'Pharma-Bro' Martin Shkreli" are two different people. There is a photo where Chairman Shkreli is clearly identified and he is definitely not the subject of this article, see this. Shearonink (talk) 04:53, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Agreed. That photo isn't the same person. The NAAC Shkreli goes by "Martin N. Shkreli" also, which might prevent future confusion. Grayfell (talk) 05:10, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

There are multiple people in the United States, and even in the Borough of Brooklyn, named Martin Shkreli. The New York Post wrote about it recently, see here and here ("The “other” Shkreli, 59, told reporters he was aware that the younger man was facing his own federal charges but added that the pair had never met.") So yes, both of you are correct, and there may be multiple other Martin Shkrelis, one of whom is the Chairman of NAAC. Good catch!--FeralOink (talk) 07:26, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Martin Shkreli. 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/20151220061122/http://ir.kalobios.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=943772 to http://ir.kalobios.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=943772
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.denverpost.com/2017/09/08/martin-shkreli-bond-hillary-clinton/
• Corrected formatting/usage for https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/pharma-bro-martin-shkreli-apologizes-hillary-clinton-post-n800836
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/Judge-Hear-Arguments-Lock-Up-Pharma-Bro-Martin-Shkreli-Clinton-Hair-Pulling-Comment-444121493.html

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) 08:15, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Martin Shkreli. 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/20151122022744/http://finance.yahoo.com/news/kalobios-stock-rockets-investment-shkreli-194805694.html to https://finance.yahoo.com/news/kalobios-stock-rockets-investment-shkreli-194805694.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for https://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/05/business/drug-prices-valeant-martin-shkreli-congress.html
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://esportsgo.com/enemy-esports-turned-1-2-million-league-legends-team/esports

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) 04:53, 12 January 2018 (UTC)