Talk:Noel Biderman

Jewish

He gave an interview to a Jewish business magazine and spoke about how he reconciles his Jewish religious values with running a company that promotes infidelity. He should be included in a category for Australian Jews.

http://jewishbusinessmagazine.com/jewish-business-news/ashley-madisons-ceo-noel-biderman/# —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.140.85.63 (talk) 07:45, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

While it is appropriate in Biderman's case to include that he is Jewish, but there is a misquote (and sounds quite malicious) that I am correcting: "We're just Jews. No website or 30-second ad is going to convince anyone to cheat..."[6] Correct quote is--> "We are just a platform" (source quoted: http://www.salon.com/2015/04/29/amy_schumer%E2%80%99s_chat_with_ashley_madison_ceo_encourage_men_to_cheat_when_women_gain_weight_then_profit/ ) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cielovista (talk • contribs) 18:50, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Australian?

Is there a source for this sleaze-merchant's alleged Australian origin? Because a quick google search brings up several articles saying this jerk is Canadian, unfortunately.

Merge with Ashley Madison

Why not merge this article with Ashley Madison? The only thing this person is referenced for is his company. Qqqqqq (talk) 01:32, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

Good point, actually. It seems like editors have used this article to vent about the service, not much is relevant or specific to the life of Mr. Biderman. Synergee (talk) 06:13, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Personal Life section

The personal section is limited to his nativity and his ethnicity and/or religious affiliation. In the career section there is more personal information than in the two sentences in the appropriate section. "As the public face of the company, the former lawyer and sports agent has said he is a happily married father of two and does not himself cheat."

One option is to eliminate the personal section and incorporate the two personal tidbits into the article where it would make sense, most likely the intro which is partially biographical and personal summary of the subject. Suggested Example with additions in brackets: "Noel Biderman (born 1971) is a [Jewish-]Canadian internet entrepreneur [and Toronto native]. He is the CEO of Avid Life Media, notably for owning a dating web site named Ashley Madison, established in 2001, that is intended for married people to arrange adulterous affairs."

Another option is to keep the personal section and incorporate the extra information into it. Preferably this option should also attempt to source more personal information on the subject like length of marriage or children, number of marriages, political affiliations if any, notable relatives, friends or employees, etc.

Hope broaching this helps. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.86.106.167 (talk) 21:08, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Daily Mail, New York Daily News, and US Weekly as BLP sources

@Ameteurdemographer: I'm quite concerned about the usage of Daily Mail, New York Daily News, and US Weekly as reliable sources to support the highly-controversial allegations of infidelity by the BLP subject of the article. As per WP:BLPSOURCES, "Material should not be added to an article when the only sourcing is tabloid journalism. When material is both verifiable and noteworthy, it will have appeared in more reliable sources." Thanks, RJaguar3 | u | t 00:39, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

are those sites on a blacklist? if so, please link me to it. otherwise that fact that you yourself are concerned about a news site for whatever reason, isn't a real concern. Ameteurdemographer (talk) 00:46, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

By this i mean i hope you're not opposed to those new channels because of the political agenda they might promote . ex liberal hating fox news or conservative hating the guardian or huffington post.Ameteurdemographer (talk) 00:50, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Buzzfeed (the original news source) provided the emails as a source. Wired also covered this, a non tabloid. --P00rb (talk) 20:42, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Watch for COI editing.

Press reports indicate COI editing on this article.[1] Note changes in last year.[2] Please watch. Thanks. John Nagle (talk) 20:21, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

The article in its current state does show signs of COI editing. Perhaps there needs to be an info box warning that the article may fall below accuracy standards? LuciusAeliusSejanus (talk) 10:11, 2 September 2016 (UTC)