Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a2371e61dc07cf42

Jump to content

Talk:Paul Singer

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 2 months ago by Jeffrey34555 in topic Requested move 13 May 2026


Billionaire term in lead sentence

[edit]

I'd like to discuss and ultimately reach consensus about if the term "billionaire" should be placed as the first adjective in the lead sentence. A couple of editors have recently added it to the article, and since I've removed it, I thought it would be appropriate to encourage dialogue here. While it's an accurate term, and I have no problem describing a living person as a billionaire, I don't believe that term should primarily define a man or woman. And for that reason, it should not be the first term to describe a person in the lead sentence. Instead, I believe a reader should be presented with the source's source of occupation before the billionaire term is presented. I checked numerous other Wikipedia pages of well-known billionaires (Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, Mark Zuckerburg, Elon Musk, Larry Page, etc.) and found that philosophy was consistently employed there. The lead sentence uses adjectives that describes what they've done, not what they have. And while I understand that other Wikipedia articles do not a provide policy or guideline on this particular BLP, it does provide a meaningful example for consideration about how other editors have achieved consensus on this point. Some of everything (talk) 22:57, 8 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Some of everything Paul Singer is a financial predator, who's distinguishing achievement is destroying other nations' finances. He is not known for any positive contributions to humanity, and as such, his achievement of being a billionaire would be his primary, if not his sole distinction. Stevenmitchell (talk) 21:10, 19 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

Epstein accusation

[edit]

It should be added that Representative Massie has accused him of funding a campaign to block his efforts to release the Epstein files. Source: https://www.instagram.com/reel/DOMckW_kphM/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link 73.218.73.83 (talk) 17:25, 5 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

Requested move 13 May 2026

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Jeffrey34555 (talk) 05:54, 23 May 2026 (UTC)Reply


– Overwhelmingly the primary topic by usage (nearly 97% of pageviews in the last year), and I'm not seeing any reason to think that the other Paul Singers have enough long-term significance to outweigh that. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 23:16, 13 May 2026 (UTC)  Relisting. TarnishedPathtalk 00:02, 21 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.