Jump to content

Talk:Anna Sorokin

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleAnna Sorokin has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
September 21, 2018Articles for deletionKept
June 13, 2021Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on August 13, 2021.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that while convicted fraudster Anna Sorokin was in jail, one of her visitors was Julia Garner, who will play Sorokin in the Netflix miniseries about her?
Current status: Good article

Did you know nomination

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Chipmunkdavis (talk) 15:05, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by Firefly (talk). Nominated by Epicgenius (talk) at 18:49, 19 July 2021 (UTC).[reply]

  • General eligibility:

Policy compliance:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Fascinating article, with some really great hooks. GA'd recently, no issues with copyvio, length or sourcing. I like ALT1 but am suggesting a change to that so we can include a link to the miniseries as well. It's a shame that there's no properly licensed image, but oh well. The only thing missing is the QPQ, once that's done I'll be ready to promote this. BuySomeApples (talk) 23:39, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Suggesting ALT1b:... that while convicted fraudster Anna Sorokin was in jail, one of her guests was Julia Garner, who will playing Sorokin in the the Netflix miniseries about her?

Not sure whether I need to do the QPQ as the article expander, or Epic as the nominator. If me, I reviewed this one recently. As for the hook, I'd suggest "... who will play Sorokin in the Netflix miniseries about her", as the series is still in production, and I think "in" works better grammatically. firefly ( t · c ) 06:12, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Good catch, I edited ALT1b to include the future tense. Per the rules, the nominator has to be the one to do QPQ. I messaged Epicgenius on his talkpage so hopefully that will be ready soon.BuySomeApples (talk) 07:01, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
BuySomeApples, apologies for nit-picking but we still have some tense disagreement there. "who will playing" should either be "who will play" or "who will be playing". Thanks! firefly ( t · c ) 12:00, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Firefly: Don't worry about the QPQ, I think it's my responsibility since I nominated it. I just added a review here - I forgot to add it earlier but I found time to do a review just now.
BuySomeApples Thanks for the review and sorry for not getting back earlier. I've added a QPQ now. For ALT1b I can suggest ALT1c: ... that while convicted fraudster Anna Sorokin was in jail, one of her guests was Julia Garner, who will play Sorokin in the the Netflix miniseries about her? Epicgenius (talk) 18:56, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That hook definitely works @Epicgenius:, thanks for finishing the QPQ! BuySomeApples (talk) 21:49, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
To T:DYK/P3

Russian name

[edit]

Since some people insist on including it, can someone provide any source (that is not clearly based on this article) that her middle name is "Vadimovna" or that her birth name is "Anna Vadimovna Sorokina"? The only sources I can find were written long after this article included the false name and most likely copied it from there. The indictment by the State of New York does not contain any middle name. It seems we have another Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg situation here (see Wikipedia:List of citogenesis incidents). Regards SoWhy 08:50, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a middle name, it's a patronym. Her father is Vadim Sorokin, she was born in Russia (where a patronym is assign to everyone automatically except some rare and special situations), so she is Anna Vadimovna Sorokina — at least, she was born with this name. Not also everywhere her father's name is Vadim, there are also some small comments from her father 1, 2, where he is named Vadim.--2A00:1370:817C:83A9:3C0D:98AE:261B:CA83 (talk) 13:28, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That is original research though if you cannot provide a source to back up that claim. Not even the Russian sources actually use that name. Additionally, while she was born in Russia, she has become a German citizen in the meantime and there is no such rule for German names, so even if such a name had been originally assigned in Russia, she might have dropped it per article 47 section 1 #3 of the EGBGB which allows the person to "give up components of the name that German law does not provide for" in case of naturalization. So saying she was called "Anna Vadimovna Sorokina" and saying her name still is "Anna Vadimovna Sorokin" both require adequate sourcing to be included. Regards SoWhy 20:07, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with SoWhy. I understand Russian naming conventions, and understand that she would have been "Anna Vadimovna Sorokina" by those conventions initially. However, because someone was born with a certain name does not mean they must carry that name for life. Plenty of people change their name for all sorts of reasons, and it appears that Sorokin did just that and is now known as "Anna Sorokin". If we can find a source for her birth name, we could say something like "... born Anna Vadimovna Sorokina". firefly ( t · c ) 11:15, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I just reverted the addition again [1]. An IP user claimed that this was a RS for the birth name but it was published on 14 February 2022, so it's pretty obvious that they just copied from Wikipedia when writing that article. Regards SoWhy 09:20, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I found this source from Feb 2021 which gives the birth name as "Anna Vadimovna Sorokina", however our article had that in it even back then, so this could also very well be citogenesis. I think the best idea is to not list a separate birth name until and unless we find a source pre-dating the name's inclusion in Wikipedia. firefly ( t · c ) 15:13, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Now stop being silly y'all. The Russian language wikipedia entry is Сорокин,Анна so that is her name in common usage. She is discussed throughout as Сорокина. Her official name is of course the feminine form А́нна Вади́мовна Соро́кина. She would be called Mrs Sorokina in every day life, or else (e.g. by colleagues with whom she is on good terms) А́нна Вади́мовна which is at once a fairly friendly but also polite form of address. But we just call her Anna Sorokin. 2A01:CB0C:CD:D800:B8F5:8448:7632:1DBF (talk) 10:56, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Russian Wikipedia might have different standards but this is not the Russian Wikipedia. There is no evidence whatsoever that this confirmed German citizen is regularly called "Sorokina". You are again basing your reasoning solely on your personal knowledge of Russian naming customs. Which is, as pointed out above, original research. And not even good original research because, again, Sorokin is a German citizen and German law does not recognize such feminine forms. Regards SoWhy 12:05, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Just saying: knowledge of Russian naming customs is not "personal knowledge", it's common knowledge. (Smth like, transliteration of Russian letters, or that Moscow is actually named Москва, except when talking about town in Wisconsin or Vermont, USA.) At least, common enough to not qualify as original research: that daughter of a Mr. Sorokin is called Sorokina. Any chance to learn her own preferences? If she herself used name form "Anna Sorokin", then it's good. But if she referred to herself only as Anna Sorokina and Anna Delvey, then article name "Anna Sorokin" is not the best. I think personal preference trumps even official document here? As in: immigrant may be issued document according to country of residence name customs, but that does not change their actual given name, or how they want to be called. BirgittaMTh (talk) 15:44, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

German?

[edit]

Why does the first sentence say she is a “German” con artist when she was born in Russia? 2601:C6:C580:130:8087:C43:2111:4797 (talk) 02:41, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

She was born in Russia but holds German citizenship. firefly ( t · c ) 09:47, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
She was born in Russia and lived there until she was 17. She lived briefly in Germany from 2007 to 2011, and obtained German citizenship at that time. Since 2011 she has mainly lived in London, Paris and the United States. Considering that she only stayed in Germany briefly and became notable when living in the United States, it doesn't seem WP:DUE or very accurate to describe her primarily as a "German" con artist in the first sentence; the activities that made her famous have no connection to Germany, she doesn't live there and hasn't lived there in nearly a decade, and she isn't originally from or raised there either. She has lived for far longer in both Russia and the United States. The lead could mention that she holds German citizenship somewhere below. --Tataral (talk) 20:52, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Tataral: She is a German citizen, so if anything is misleading, it's writing "Russian-born" without any more information. Either use "Russian-born German" or don't mention any nationalities at all. In fact, per WP:UNDUE, "Russian-born" has even less relevance in the first sentence since her place of birth has nothing to do at all with her notability. Her German citizenship is at least relevant since ICE wants to deport her to Germany but her Russian heritage seems completely irrelevant. So I would suggest we remove both from the lede. Agreed? Regards SoWhy 20:47, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Gérard Depardieu is a Russian citizen but we call him a French actor, and only mention his Russian citizenship below in the article. In less straightforward cases such as this one, or the Depardieu case, citizenship is not necessarily a WP:DUE or very meaningful descriptor in the first sentence. Yes, we could remove both; at least that would be better than describing her as a "German con artist" which gives a misleading impression and which is not how she has been described by most sources. On the other hand I don't see any strong reasons to remove Russian-born, which is how most sources have described her. But if you insist on it, I'm not going to object. --Tataral (talk) 17:51, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No - go with "Russian-born German". Experience with similar cases (like Francis Bacon) shows if you just leave it out, there will be an endless stream of good-faith editors adding something (anything). Best to add a hidden note saying this formula was decided on in talk too. Johnbod (talk) 02:59, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
But she isn't a German con artist, she is a Russian-born person who only became notable as a con artist when she was a long-time US resident, who lived for four years in Germany as a late teenager/young adult many years before she became notable. In practice her decade-long US residency is far more important than her German citizenship, in terms of notability. She has held citizenship of three countries, most recently Germany. Of course we should mention her citizenship, like we mention Gérard Depardieu's Russian citizenship, but not in the first sentence. --Tataral (talk) 11:44, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Johnbod and Tataral: I have taken the liberty to completely rewrite the lead since it didn't adequately summarize the article anyway. I think this way is okay to address both sides without having to spell it out in the first sentence. On a side note, I'm not an immigration lawyer myself but one of my colleagues is and she told me that there is no conceivable way that someone from Russia would have been able to get German citizenship this quickly in 2007 unless they were "Spätaussiedler", i.e. people with ethnic German roots, who are the only group from the former Eastern Block that can get German citizenship upon request. That would explain much about her citizenship and make "German" in the lead seem correct, although this is of course (informed) speculation only since no source seems to care about how she got her citizenship and the only way to really know would be to access her official citizenship information which is nigh impossible. Regards SoWhy 19:14, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This doesn't really meet WP norms for bios, where a nationality is expected in the first sentence - no doubt there's a policy somewhere. I think you'll find helpful people will now keep adding nationalities. Johnbod (talk) 03:06, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Johnbod: Well, MOS:FIRSTBIO does not explicitly require the nationality to be mentioned in the first paragraph (and mentions examples like Petrarch). On the other hand, MOS:ETHNICITY advises against Tataral's preference of having "Russian-born" in the first paragraph, explicitly saying previous nationalities or the place of birth should not be mentioned in the lead unless relevant to the subject's notability (and I think we can all agree that her previous nationality and place of birth have nothing to do with her notability). Personally, I don't necessarily think we need "German" in the first paragraph since her being German is of little relevance to her notability (except that she pretended to be a German heiress and not a Russian one), however, if any nationality is added, German is the only one that should be added based on the relevant MOS I cited above. If this is contentious, we probably need an RFC or some other way to get more input and reach consensus. Regards SoWhy 07:28, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well, whatever - you'll be maintaining this from all the changes then? Of course, if the US ever manages to deport her, Germany will become more relevant. Johnbod (talk) 12:52, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Inaccurate 2.0

[edit]

re 'Trial, conviction, and sentence': the terms/words 'jail' & 'prison' are used 'interchangeably/erroneously' by many, though their meanings are quite different, just as 'vagina' (the 'inside') is very often improperly used to refer to the 'vulva' (the 'outside'). Yes, I know the state of education is pathetic, and common usage causes words to 'evolve' (devolve). Just sayin'! Derfball (talk) 00:22, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently no one, including you, ever bothered to fix this so I went ahead and did it myself. GA-RT-22 (talk) 19:36, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

German national?

[edit]

The article says Anna is German. Is there any evidence that she is a German national? Obviously she is of Russian extraction. To become a German citizen a residence of five years in Germany is required. Obviously she lived in Germany for four years only. The German Wikipedia does not mention German citizenship. Ontologix (talk) 17:14, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple reliable sources say she is German. That is the evidence we have and need (see Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth). Regards SoWhy 09:14, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Minor clarification

[edit]

I would like to suggest a change from:

Sorokin's story gained publicity when Williams wrote a lengthy article[4] in Vanity Fair about her experiences with Sorokin in 2018.

to:

Sorokin's story gained publicity when Williams wrote in 2018 a lengthy article[4] in Vanity Fair about her experiences with Sorokin.

189.94.168.250 (talk) 05:57, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Jewish ancestry claim added in a 3 September 2024 edit is unsubstantiated

[edit]

The tidbit of information was added in this edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Anna_Sorokin&oldid=1243840575

It cites a Jerusalem Post article about the negative depiction of Jewish characters in the media, where it is stated (in one of the many paragraphs about all sorts of different shows) that "Sorokin [who] is Jewish". But I cannot find such a claim anywhere else on the internet (other than in a comment on Reddit where someone asked if she's Jewish). I don't know where did the author of that article took this information from, but it is likely incorrect.

It seems Sorokin herself has never made such a claim and it is not part of her depiction in the media, so perhaps the article's author was mistaken due to the Jewish background of the actress portraying her (Julia Garner).

I cannot edit the article as it's semi-protected, but I suggest someone revert that edit. ThisNameIsAvailable (talk) 19:39, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, I think the Jerusalem Post article is referring to Anna Sorokin's Jewish heritage, not Julia Garner's, which is also mentioned at some point too. I also think that the Jerusalem Post is reasonably reliable. It makes sense because the German government has introduced a very easy way of immigration for Jews from the former Soviet Union under the term Kontingentflüchtlinge. Under this law (you can read the translated German Wikipedia article on it), Jewish immigrants to Germany from the former Soviet Union receive German citizenship immediately upon arrival. This makes sense because we know that Sorokin's family immigrated to Germany in 2007, but she left Germany around 2012, and the only way she could have gotten German citizenship would be under this law, since you need at least 7 years of residence in Germany to naturalise normally. Sorokin is also a very common name among Jewish Russians. Ros.mary90 (talk) 21:39, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't say that the Jerusalem Post article wasn't referring to Sorokin, but I said it possibly did so incorrectly due to a conceptual mix-up.
Regardless of what might be inferred to by some German law (I'm not going to read through the entire German code of law to assess whether the scenario you mentioned is the only way for Sorokin to have received citizenship), there are zero other reliable instances (and maybe one overall on the internet) of mentions of Anna Sorokin supposedly being Jewish, which makes that snippet written en passant in the Jerusalem Post article highly suspicious.
Regarding the surname Sorokin, it is a standard Russian surname and not specifically Jewish. You can look in this Wikipedia page and see that the vast majority none of the Sorokins who have an article are Jewish: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorokin
Either way, relying on the type of surname is too speculative.
Edit: It seems even that Sorokin is not Jewish at all. There is a different name, Sorkin, which is commonly Jewish: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorkin

ThisNameIsAvailable (talk) 22:04, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorokin is in the category "Surnames of Jewish origin" and is indeed a name that is very common among Russian Jews (but also non-Jews). Just because it isn't mentioned in an article of a person doesn't mean, the person isn't. Ros.mary90 (talk) 22:15, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
All of the Sorokin articles are of non-Jewish people. Whoever placed that category in the Sorokin surname page made an error, because it seems etymologically unrelated to Sorkin which is an actual Jewish surname, for which you can find many articles about people of actual Jewish origin.
This speculation needs to stop. Let's wait for another editor who can edit the article and decide whether to remove an unfounded citation which is singular to the entirety of journalistic and biographic discussion on Anna Sororkin. ThisNameIsAvailable (talk) 22:27, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed it because of the ambiguous and dubious sourcing, and the unsourced "Jewish family" bit. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 22:34, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. And if we're at it, perhaps I'll remove the Surnames of Jewish origin category from the Sorokin disambiguation page as it has been added at random by some blocked user way back. ThisNameIsAvailable (talk) 22:44, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Clarify and emphasize fraud in the one liner at the top

[edit]

Change intro from: Anna Sorokin (Russian: Анна Сорокина; born January 23, 1991), also known as Anna Delvey, is a con artist and fraudster who posed as a wealthy heiress to access upper-class New York social and art scenes from 2013 to 2017.

To: Anna Sorokin (Russian: Анна Сорокина; born January 23, 1991), also known as Anna Delvey, is a con artist and fraudster who posed as a wealthy heiress to secure large sums of capital and access upper-class New York social and art scenes from 2013 to 2017.

Explanation: The one liner suggests financial fraud, but only by hovering over the link on "Fraudster" is it made concrete that the fraud is meant technically and not colloquially as in "she's a fraud". Because of the lack of specificity and emphasis I initially read this and thought Anna was merely a party crasher rather than a convicted criminal which is far more relevant for explaining why she has such a well built out article. Flying Acorns (talk) 16:38, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Not done: Naming her as a fraudster (which is the term for someone who committed fraud and is not intended as a colloquialism) in the lead is sufficient, and there is plenty of elaboration on her crimes later in the article. DrOrinScrivello (talk) 19:34, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Opinion on Photo Utilized in "Fraud" Section

[edit]

Given the seeming -- contentiousness? -- of editing of this article (I realize that WP:BLP applies, here), I wanted to ask peoples' opinions on the 'catwalk'/fashion model photo utilized in the "Fraud" section, specifically this photo. I feel that:

1. My primary concern, here, is this is a MOS:PERTINENCE issue. I simply fail to see what value this image's use constitutes (to this particular article). Especially when we are utilizing a third-party's visage.

2. It's possible that users may, at a glance, mistake the model for the article's subject, a possible WP:BLP issue. Particularly on desktop, the image is fairly small.

3. I simply fail to see what value this image's use constitutes. Especially when we are utilizing a third-party's visage.

My contention is that this image should be removed.

Thoughts?

cheers :-) MWFwiki (talk) 03:54, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I added that photo. I don't understand the difference between your points 1 and 3. If you want to remove the photo I won't object. GA-RT-22 (talk) 04:38, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Haha, sorry, I forgot to remove 3, I ended-up adding it to point 1. Okay, thanks for the response, I'll wait a bit, see if anyone else chimes-in. MWFwiki (talk) 08:00, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I actually kind of agree with you. I was searching for photos to help illustrate that section. But that particular photo doesn't really illustrate the New York show as opposed to any other show, nor does it illustrate anything about Anna's attendance. GA-RT-22 (talk) 00:16, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Anna_Sorokin&oldid=1256057400"