Talk:Nathan Wolfe
Add topic| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Proposed section: Association with Jeffrey Epstein
[edit]Following the January 2026 DOJ file release pursuant to the Epstein Transparency Act, multiple reliable sources have reported on Wolfe's correspondence with Jeffrey Epstein, including Nature,[1] The Stanford Daily,[2] and Playbill.[3] I believe this warrants a new section. Before adding, I want to flag several editorial considerations:
BLP concerns
[edit]This is a biography of a living person, so we need to be especially careful with tone and sourcing. A few points:
- Section title: "Association with Jeffrey Epstein" is more appropriate than anything implying involvement in criminal activity, which no source supports. The sources describe a funding relationship and social contact, not participation in or knowledge of Epstein's crimes.
- Wolfe's response must be included: Per BLP policy, the subject's published denials and statements should be given due weight. Wolfe has responded on the record to both Nature and the Stanford Daily.
- Stick to what sources support: Mentions in the Epstein files do not indicate wrongdoing, as Nature explicitly notes. The section should not imply guilt by association beyond what is documented.
Sourcing note
[edit]The Stanford Daily reports that Wolfe used the phrase "our horny virus hypothesis" in a "2023 email" to Epstein. However, Epstein died in August 2019, making a 2023 email impossible. Nature reports the same correspondence as dating to 2013, which is consistent with the timeline. I believe the Stanford Daily date is a typo. Editors may wish to verify against the underlying DOJ document before settling on a date.
Even on the day of publication (03.02.2026) the article clearly states the phrase came from a exchange in 2013 (see Internet Archive). — Preceding unsigned comment added by ~2026-19950-01 (talk) 15:24, 31 March 2026 (UTC)
Scope
[edit]Material about Lauren Gunderson's response and the cancellation of her theatre productions is more relevant to her own article than to this one. I would recommend limiting mention of Gunderson here to what is already in the "Personal life" section (their separation in October 2025).
Comments welcome. ~2026-78656-8 (talk) 22:02, 10 February 2026 (UTC)
Photo and sections
[edit]This is a page I should have put up a while ago - can someone tell me how to upload a picture for the scientist box. Also, is it customary to include a notable publications or awards section? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zfrankel (talk • contribs) 11:15, 11:33, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
- ↑ Garisto, Dan (February 6, 2026). "Epstein files reveal deeper ties to scientists than previously known". Nature.
- ↑ Kucheria, Aadi (February 5, 2026). "Nathan Wolfe '92 denies wrongdoing, expresses regret after Epstein report". The Stanford Daily.
- ↑ Tran, Diep (February 5, 2026). "Playwright Lauren Gunderson Responds to Her Name Showing Up in the Jeffrey Epstein Files". Playbill.