Talk:Forbes list of billionaires (2005)/Archive 1

Kayle Chadd

Why is this man in the article? I've never heard of him nor are there any references. If his net worth exceeds that of Bill Gates, then don't you think a Wikipedia article would exist?

Suspicion of copyright infringement

As I understand it, copyright does not cover ideas, but the way that they are expressed. I believe that all that is needed is to reword the Forbes list, if it is desired to display here who Forbes claims the richest people are. With something as simple as a list, is there any need even to reword it?Tim Ivorson 12:12, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Copyvio discussion moved from WP:CP

• List of billionaires from [1] - contrary to an often-heard opinion, lists and compilations can be copyrighted, especially if it's a list like that that has to be compiled from so many sources (no milliardaire will publish his net worth). I fear that Forbes may sue the Wikipedia if it reprints this list without permission; what's worse, by placing it under GNU license, Wikipedia also offers a license to resell the list. I think in the worst case, this can lead to a lawsuit that ends in the complete liquidation of the Wikipedia. --Dingo 07:38, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. See Feist v. Rural. Guanaco 15:42, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. Agree with Guan after reading Feist v. Rural. This article just contains some of the info that Forbes compiled, and that raw info isn't copyrightable, even if they spent a lot of time compiling it. Copying any expressive choices that Forbes made in their manner of presenting the info would be infringement, but this article doesn't... in fact, it doesn't even take most of the data, such as age, residence, etc, so it can't be said to copy any of Forbes' expressive decisions about which data to display and in what order. - Eisnel 08:03, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)
    • I'm not sure about this. Firstly, a telephone directory is raw, published data. The compilation I see is that Forbes compiled data into one net worth figure; so the compilation is not the list, but the claim that Citizen Kane has a net worth of 4.567 billion. Eg, as Forbes compiled Ingvar Kamprads net worth to about 50+ billion, IKEA repudiated that in that Kamprad does not earn the firm fully, and so IKEAs net worth is not to be added to Kamprad. Secondly, is only US-law to be considered, or also laws of other english-speaking countries like GB, AU or NZ? To sum it up, you may be right - but is the Wikipedia willing to risk you're not? --Dingo 11:51, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)
      • Non-US law is irrelevant if the source of the information was on a web server in the United States. The Wikipedia servers are in the United States and thus subject to American law. Since Forbes.com is also in the United States, it is also governed by American law. David Newton 15:38, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)
      • If Forbes, after much research, says that Kane is worth 4.567 billion, it's not copyvio for other news organizations to report that "Forbes says Citizen Kane makes 4.567 bil". It doesn't matter whether that number is a fact or not, Forbes could lie and it still wouldn't be illegal to report Forbes' figure. If Forbes discovered a new planet, would it be copyright infringement for other news sources to report about this planet, since it was Forbes' hard work that led to its discovery? If Forbes compiles a list of the moons that are around this planet, do they now own that list, and can they sue anybody that lists the new planet's moons? This really isn't what copyright is about, from what I understand. You're right that anytime we non-lawyers try to interpret copyright law we walk on shaky ground. You're also right that other countries might interpret this differently. But that applies to most of the images and a good number of the articles on Wikipedia. Think of all the images we use under fair use: that's US fair use law, they all might be illegal in NZ or elsewhere. We just have to do our best to interpret the most relevant and prevalent copyright laws in good faith, and strive onward. So there's my two cents. I don't want to sound harsh, I am happy that you're out there scrutinizing possible copyvio articles and trying to protect Wikipedia against unscrupulous lawyers. And your post here led to some very interesting info that I never knew before. I'm interested to hear how others interpret this situation. - Eisnel 15:54, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

End of moved discussion Lupo 07:13, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)

#1

I think Bill Gates is the richest man in the world.

Abigail Johnson

Who is Abigail Johnson? She's listed on Time magazine's 100 most influential people. RickK 03:16, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Forbes says she's president of Fidelity Management & Research Co., which is a subcompany of Fidelity Investments, the biggest US mutual fund manager. She's expected to replace her father as CEO of the company as a whole when her father retires. [2] [3] -- Cyrius|&#9998 10:25, Apr 21, 2004 (UTC)

Douglas B. Jordan?

Number 59 Stefan Quandt (Germany - $6.5 billion) replaced with Douglas B. Jordan? - Jerryseinfeld 14:26, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

In lack of response I put Mr. Quandt back. - Jerryseinfeld 00:33, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Titles

About [4]. I'm not explaining this one more time, NO titles, understand? - Jerryseinfeld 02:18, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Sir, Gerald Grosvenor is the Duke of Westminster. It is not merely a title, but part of his name. Wikipedia policy is to ignore a peerage ONLY in cases where the peerage was gained on retirement (Harold Macmillan, Margaret Thatcher) or ignored throughout one's life (Bertrand Russell). I'm afraid that you are in the wrong on this matter. Mackensen (talk) 03:02, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I don't care if he got 100 names, I'm not going to write all of them. It sounds like the kind of nonsense that made us leave europe in the first place. - Jerryseinfeld 04:12, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Be that as it may, that's your POV and when it conflicts with established fact and policy the latter must and does take precedence. His name is Gerald Cavendish, 6th Duke of Wellington. Further removal of his full name may constitute vandalism. Mackensen (talk) 04:42, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Well my full name is Jerry The Great, so you better start addressing me properly or I'll send my vassals at you. - Jerryseinfeld 10:23, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Liliane Bettencourt's nationality

According to the information in the linked article, she appears to be French. Why is she listed as an American here? MK2 07:06, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

2005

Someone should update the list for 2005 [5] --Madchester 07:45, 2005 Mar 11 (UTC)

People waiting to be sorted

There's a lot of people at the bottom of the list waiting to be sorted. Question - when breaking a tie is necessaery (which it often is near the bottom of the list) how should we do so? Pakaran 12:56, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

• I've had to break quite a few ties; I recompiled most of the top 300 for 2005. I did it alphabetically by family name. Dale Arnett 05:28, 21 May 2005 (UTC)

John Walton

So when is John Walton going to be taken off the list, since he died in a plane crash a few days ago?

I see he's off the list now but, where did the money go? shouldn't some family members increase in networth or someone new be added to the list?. That money didn't just dissappear. --62.251.90.73 2 July 2005 11:17 (UTC)

I don't know about this, he died in June. So he was a billionaire from January to June in 2005--is there an exact point in the year at which we consider this list "snapshotted"? It may be appropriate to keep him on.NTK 17:17, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Images

Images screw up the list. This is list, not gallery.

I moved them out of the list, but I suggest removing them at all. mikka (t) 16:30, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

Chad Mittal???

The picture used and the information given reference Lakshmi Mittal! I changed the WikiLink to Lakshmi Mittal but left the name the same. A google search for "Chad Mittal" brings up absolutely no results! Why was he named as Chad in this?

Bruce Lunnis

Who is this guy? I never heard of him. he can't be the 3rd richest man. This is obviously vandalism. His profile is only one sentence long and it claimes he is 15. Someone fix this!

This user (User:196.25.253.14) has been involved in VERY subversive vandalism, please see his contributions. He also created Lunnis Corporation, which is nonexistent and is consequently listed on Category:Wikipedia articles needing factual verification. I've removed "Bruce Lunnis" from the list. This guy isn't very smart - there is a great probability that this is the actual user's name. FranksValli 07:51, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

Graeme Hart

On 3 News on 18 November it was stated that Graeme Hart is worth billions. Why isn't he in the list?

210.86.91.34 05:48, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

Murdoch is not Australian

Rupert Murdoch is not an Australian - see his article: quote - "On September 4, 1985, Murdoch became a naturalized citizen to satisfy the legal requirement that only United States citizens could own American television stations"

He was born in Melbourne, started news corp in Adelaide, but gave up his Australian citizenship in 1985.

Vivian Wu is not a billionaire

Go check the ACTUAL Forbes list of billionaires. Nowhere is Vivian Wu listed. I spent hours combing through the Internet to find out how this actress accumulated her billions. The finding was that she wasn't a billionaire. **CORRECTION** Vivian Wu Yen is a billionaire in Taiwan and she is in autos. This Vivian Wu Yen is not the Vivian Wu, the Asian actress.

That's right. Vivian is an incredibly common English name in Taiwan (it is common for Chinese kids to be given a Western first name when they learn English, which they often use in English conversation rather than their Chinese name), and Wu is a very common surname. There must be tens of thousands of women named Vivian Wu in the world, especially now that one is a famous actress. NTK 17:20, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Copyright examination

Since the discussion posted above from WP:CP is not really clear, I'm politely requesting an examination of the copyright status of this list and, by extension, all other lists based on Forbes' list of richest people in the world. The reason behind this request is to see if this type of lists can ever become featured content, as in for example List of Mexican billionaires. Thank you. -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ | Esperanza 14:48, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Bill Gates pic needs reving, I can't since I don't have an account. I thought anons could edit wikipedia?

Silvio Berlusconi?

Should he be listed since he is a head of state? Others (mostly in the middle east) aren't listed. The explaination that heads of state are not included because their wealth is tied to their position should be clarified. Why not include the other heads of state? Dfuss 23:34, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

I think this is because Italy is a democracy. And in democracies (whether it's true or not), heads of state get paid a salary from the state, and do not OWN the state, (like in a monarchy). --209.128.81.201 22:49, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Donald Trump

I'm pretty sure he isn't number one... In fact he's not even close. He has under $2 billion.

yes, Marcus1060, these pages (billionaires for 2004-2006) get lots of vandalism. donald trump keeps getting put at #1 because of that crappy reality tv show he did. ~a (user • talk • contribs)

Mars family

When the Dad died in 1999 his article says he was worth 4 billion in 1999, how could they just 8 years later the family be worth 30 billion? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.110.221.182 (talk) 04:48, 7 March 2007 (UTC).