This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Jeffrey Epstein article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7Auto-archiving period: 30 days |
Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.
|
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
There have been attempts to recruit editors of specific viewpoints to this article. If you've come here in response to such recruitment, please review the relevant Wikipedia policy on recruitment of editors, as well as the neutral point of view policy. Disputes on Wikipedia are resolved by consensus, not by majority vote. |
Individuals with a conflict of interest, particularly those representing the subject of the article, are strongly advised not to directly edit the article. See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. You may request corrections or suggest content here on the Talk page for independent editors to review, or contact us if the issue is urgent. |
Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute. |
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
A news item involving Jeffrey Epstein was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 10 August 2019. |
This article has been viewed enough times in a single year to make it into the Top 50 Report annual list. This happened in 2019 and 2020. |
This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report 21 times. The weeks in which this happened:
|
While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard. |
This level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org |
Original police report was claimed to be 30 people, not 5, not 34, not 36 edit
The record is online but is mentioned several times here along with one person who broke down and told interrogator what they wanted.
Request to split scandal section edit
I had already split the R. Kelly section into the separate court case part. Now I request to split the Jeffrey Epstein scandal section the same. Darrion "Beans" Brown 🙂 (my talk page / my sandbox) 02:41, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- BTW, I was referring to split this section to "Jeffrey Epstein sex trafficking scandal". Darrion "Beans" Brown 🙂 (my talk page / my sandbox) 02:46, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think it should be split as that is his main source of notoriety. R. Kelly is more notable for his music than for his long series of crimes, while Epstein's notability as a financier is there it is inextricably tied up in it. The scandal is him and he is the scandal, etc. PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:06, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- agreeee 2001:8A0:7E0C:A400:D4D0:975E:E205:42DF (talk) 05:28, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Lede image edit
Why has the lede image been changed from Epstein's booking-photograph from 2019? Asperthrow (talk) 13:34, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- I'm a bit 50-50 on this. The 2019 mugshot isn't ideal, but the 1993 image isn't ideal either. Other thoughts required here.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 14:01, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- I changed it to the 2006 mugshot. It's the most well known photo of him in my opinion. Ccole2006 (talk) 23:27, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- I support using the 2006 mugshot. Although fairly old, it gives a much clearer look at his face than the other two options from 1993 and 2019.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 12:30, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
- I changed it to the 2006 mugshot. It's the most well known photo of him in my opinion. Ccole2006 (talk) 23:27, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
May 2024 edit
Ratmanny: This edit was automatically tagged because it used the WP:NYPOST and WP:THESUN. This should have been fixed before putting the edit straight back again with these sources. ♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 07:55, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
- But I don't see the NYPOST on the list of the currently deprecated sources. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deprecated_sources Ratmanny (talk) 08:16, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
- Both of these are listed at WP:RSP, which is why they get tagged automatically as "use of deprecated (unreliable) source" in the edit history.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 08:28, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
- Ok, now I fix it. Ratmanny (talk) 08:34, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
- The problem with this edit is that is has simply removed the two cites that were tagged as unreliable, while keeping the text the same. The statement "Epstein was known for preferring prepubescents and barely pubescents girls or looking as such at the very most, to the point of putting girls on extreme particular diets and conditions to keep them mantaining a prepuberal look and body" appears to be backed by this story in the New York Post which says "Jeffrey Epstein and his accused madam Ghislaine Maxwell put his young victims on “ridiculous,” extreme diets to maintain their “prepubescent” look, accuser Virginia Roberts Giuffre claimed." The other cites are not specifically backing this claim. Apart from being in the New York Post, the cite provides more context by saying that this is a claim made by Virginia Giuffre and does not state it as a fact. The source in The Sun also makes clear that this is a claim made by Virginia Giuffre.[1]. Despite the large number of sources added here, the specific claim about the diet comes from the New York Post and The Sun, and does not state it as a fact, only a claim by Virginia Giuffre.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 10:09, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
- I still don't get what's your point to justify the revert of all that content. Your point is just because two sources not considered valid on this Wikipedia says the same thing that others considered reliable and valid do, this is enough to invalidate all the rest? And the undebunked testimony of one of the victims is not reliable?
- https://sputnikglobe.com/20200922/epstein-maxwell-kept-sex-girls-on-special-diet-to-make-them-prepubescently-thin-accuser-claims-1080537324.html
- https://torontosun.com/news/world/jeffrey-epstein-wanted-tanned-petite-prepubescent-bodies-virginia-roberts Ratmanny (talk) 10:52, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
- You have put it straight back again even though it was pointed out that this was a claim made by Virginia Giuffre, not a proven fact. Also, the other sources are largely irrelevant WP:CITEKILL because they do not relate to the diet. This is also running into problems with due weight by putting this in the lead section without pointing out that this is simply a claim by Giuffre. I can't see why there is an obsession with adding this in the same form repeatedly after the problems were pointed out to you. This is a claim that Giuffre made in a podcast,[2] it is not really a reliable source.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 11:44, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
- The problem with this edit is that is has simply removed the two cites that were tagged as unreliable, while keeping the text the same. The statement "Epstein was known for preferring prepubescents and barely pubescents girls or looking as such at the very most, to the point of putting girls on extreme particular diets and conditions to keep them mantaining a prepuberal look and body" appears to be backed by this story in the New York Post which says "Jeffrey Epstein and his accused madam Ghislaine Maxwell put his young victims on “ridiculous,” extreme diets to maintain their “prepubescent” look, accuser Virginia Roberts Giuffre claimed." The other cites are not specifically backing this claim. Apart from being in the New York Post, the cite provides more context by saying that this is a claim made by Virginia Giuffre and does not state it as a fact. The source in The Sun also makes clear that this is a claim made by Virginia Giuffre.[1]. Despite the large number of sources added here, the specific claim about the diet comes from the New York Post and The Sun, and does not state it as a fact, only a claim by Virginia Giuffre.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 10:09, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
- Ok, now I fix it. Ratmanny (talk) 08:34, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
- Both of these are listed at WP:RSP, which is why they get tagged automatically as "use of deprecated (unreliable) source" in the edit history.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 08:28, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
Yeah, that's why in the previous version I wrote "according to Virginia Roberts Giuffre, an alleged victim of Epstein", wasn't ok even written that way? Ratmanny (talk) 15:27, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
- Please suggest a place to put it that isn't in the lead section. I removed it mainly because I agreed with Ianmacm's comment: it doesn't belong in the lead. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 15:32, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
- The problem is I don't know in what section to put it besides the lead. I mean, I could put the part of how he used to prefer his victims in the lead and the testimony of Virginia Giuffre in the Legal proceeding section but I don't know where specifically. Ratmanny (talk) 15:38, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
- Well? Ratmanny (talk) 07:42, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
- Well what? If you can't find a place for it in the body, that's not an argument in favor of dumping it in the first paragraph... Nomoskedasticity (talk) 09:35, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
- If you add it to the first paragraph again, you will likely be blocked. – Muboshgu (talk) 14:59, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
- The WP:LEAD should not contain orphaned statements. These are statements that appear only in the lead and do not appear elsewhere in the article. There has been a problem here with adding material to the lead section simply to ensure that it appears prominently in the article, but that is not what the lead section is there for. The lead is simply a summary of what appears later on in the article.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 17:12, 29 May 2024 (UTC)