Talk:Carlos Slim

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Where is the list of acquisitions?[edit]

And business startups? Didn't learn anything except his fathers name and his history. Nothing about the businesses.

Ottoman Empire[edit]

Ottoman Empire: It was destroyed before he was born so please check if the Ottoman Army actually did try to conscript this man
That statement refers to his father. Kuru (talk) 01:08, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted Helu[edit]

This thing has been pointed out several times but nobody actually corrected the mistake. Helu is his second surname and virtually no one in Mexico calls him that way. The people who named the article are complete outsiders and ignorants (see the Spanish-language version). Nobody calls Carlos Fuentes "Carlos Fuentes Macias" or Frida Kahlo "Frida Kahlo Calderon" or Salma Hayek, "Salma Hayek Jimenez" or Alfonso Cuaron "Alfonso Cuaron Orozco", just to give well-known examples. It is true that there are people who WILLINGLY choose to be addressed under both (paternal and maternal) surnames (Gabriel Garcia Marquez, Mario Vargas Llosa, Federico Garcia Lorca, Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu...) and people who WILLINGLY use only their maternal surname (Pablo Picasso, Diego Velázquez, Eduardo Galeano...) so the point here is to verify first the way people choose to be named or happen to be known instead of using arbitrary criteria.--Scandza (talk) 15:15, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The HTML title on his web site says "Carlos Slim Helú", as does the title graphic. 200.125.112.113 (talk) 07:26, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

for a Mexican and Spanish person, it's a little disrespectful to take away his mother's last name, because it is like denying one's mother. If he uses Helú is his personal choice, and also distinguishes him from Carlos Slim Domit, his son. Salma Hayek is an actress and she is entitled to change her name to whatever she pleases, Rosa Perez or the like, because that's the Hollywood way. Mr. Slim is not a movie star. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.44.93.16 (talk) 07:26, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sons[edit]

I removed the following sentence from section "world's richest person":
He has 2 sons: Christian Ani (last name was changed) and Sean Flowers ( from his hispanic mother). (sic)
Apart from being not appropriately placed (obviously should be in section family), the introduction speaks of three sons leading his "empire". Also, what was changed and what? --Ben T/C 05:42, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is a good thing you removed that information because it was not correct. Slim has three sons not just two and those are not their names. Also all three sons have the same mother and she was not Hispanic either. Both of Slim's parents were Lebanese immigrants and his wife Souraya was, as he is, a Mexican national born of Lebanese parentage. So his sons are 100% Lebanese ethnicity. I was born in Mexico but my parents were immigrants from Japan; although Mexico is my home and I speak Spanish and not Japanese, I am not "Hispanic" and the same goes for Slim and his sons. 76.22.241.84 (talk) 03:04, 3 May 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.22.241.84 (talk) 03:03, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pronunciation[edit]

I wonder if the H is his name is pronounced, since he's not of Spanish descent. 71.117.93.160 12:06, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

it's possible Helú | Pronunciation of Helú in Spanish (youglish.com) Brawlio (talk) 01:23, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Richest[edit]

According to the latest Forbes 400, C.S. Helu and Bill Gates are tied at $59B. Read here. http://www.forbes.com/lists/2007/54/richlist07_William-Gates-III_BH69.html

Someone should fix this. Animadictio 12:15, 1 October 2007 (UTC)AnimaDictio at animadictio@gmail.com[reply]

The thing about "richest-person-in-the-world" info is that it can change every day/week/month/quarter/year, depending on how each person's many stock shares are currently valued. Probably a better way to break this out is to say in the lead simply "He is one of the richest people in the world", which is pipe-linked to List of billionaires (2007), and then just update the link once per year (e.g., change "2007" to "2008"). (New article starts with each year, as seen at List of billionaires.) It's pointless to reinvent in each rich person's article all that discussion of how things are figured and the pros and cons and details, when you can simply transclude it from the main article about such things. Maybe I'll implement this plan soon if I get "free time" (ha ha). — Lumbercutter 23:02, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Follow-up: It only took a minute to implement this plan, so I just did it now. — Lumbercutter 23:11, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Now he has 51 billion dollars pleaase change your post. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.179.9.65 (talk) 16:23, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Correction[edit]

the first sentence should read:

"Carlos Slim Helú, born January 28, 1940 in Mexico City, is a Mexican businessman and one of the wealthiest men in the world as of October 14, 2007."

not:

"Carlos Slim Helú, born January 28, 1940 in Mexico City, is a Mexican businessman and one of the wealthiest man in the world as of October 14, 2007." 64.91.205.144 (talk) 06:39, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The first section of the Awards section should read:

"Slim has been awarded the Entrepreneurial Merit Medal of Honor from Mexico's Chamber of Commerce. He is a "gold patron" of the American Academy of Achievement,[8] and the Belgian government awarded him the Leopold II Commander Medal, CEO of the year in 2003 by Latin Trade business magazine and one year later CEO of the decade by the same magazine."

not:

"Slim has been awarded the Entrepreneurial Merit Medal of Honor from Mexico's Chamber of Commerce. He is a "gold patron" of the American Academy of Achievement,[8] and the Belgian government awarded him the Leopold II Commander Meda, CEO of the year in 2003 by Latin Trade business magazine and one year later CEO of the decade by the same magazine." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.39.105.141 (talk) 17:24, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't remove footnotes[edit]

Looking at the history of this article, I can see that some editors have removed footnotes. Please don't do that unless the footnote doesn't actually back up the statement. It is OK to use the same reference multiple times in an article. In fact, if a particular reference backs up multiple statements in an article, then the reference should be reused. --JHP (talk) 05:11, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ottoman Dynasty[edit]

why is this page listed in the Ottoman Dynasty category? Lee.shoe (talk) 06:21, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OLPC[edit]

Is it worth mentioning that he has ordered thousands of "One laptop per child" laptops for mexican children? --88.73.219.26 (talk) 07:13, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Forbes mistake?[edit]

I must say something i noticed.The stock prices that were used for the list are from 11th of february.OK.Arcelormittal close price for 11th of febr is 67.82 you can see that on the site.Also,another thing you can see is mittal family stake which is 43.04%=623620000 million shares.If you make a multiplication 623620000 x 67.82 thats equal to 42293908400 billion dollars...why Forbes says its 45? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.72.69.137 (talk) 19:26, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How the **** did this guy become so rich?[edit]

I wish there was more information about this really... I mean, everyone knows the story of Warren Buffett and Gates but its like out of the blue some random Mexican guy suddenly becomes the second richest man in the world... how?

I just want more information on that.

The article says that by the time he was 26, he had $40m, without stating the source(s) of that wealth. Jim Michael (talk) 08:30, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reopening this thread[edit]

I am also interested in the source of Slim's wealth at an early age. Did he inherit it from his father's real estate holdings? What? Purplebackpack89 02:17, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

World's richest man redirection[edit]

When I typed in "World's Richest Man" on search, it redirected me to here. I think we should change it to redirect to Warren Buffet or List of Billionaires. At least, it shouldn't redirect here since Helu is not richest man anymore.Stevv (talk) 20:35, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article is Forbes list of billionaires. Jim Michael (talk) 08:35, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Worth[edit]

I noticed that his net worth is said to have increased as indicated by the green upward arrow yet the article states that his net worth is now 60 billion down from 68 billion a year ago. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.49.43.6 (talk) 18:39, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Helú[edit]

You should remove and avoid mentioning his mother's maiden name "Helu" as if it were his surname. In many Latin American countries, a person is known by his/her name, surname and mother's maiden name. The comparison with the American usage is that the Americans use "name, middle name and surname (family name)". That's why many English speaking persons mistake the Mother's maiden name as if it were the surname or family name. Mr. Carlos Slim should be addressed as Mr. Slim, and NOT Mr. Helu. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.37.120.18 (talk) 22:27, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On a different but related matter, whence comes "Helú" anyway? The article says his mother's maiden name is Haddad (a good Lebanese name) and that he "officially became Julián Slim Haddad by adding Haddad, his mother's surname, according to the Spanish-language naming customs" (quoting directly from the "Biography" section). 69.115.13.5 (talk) 14:50:21, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Haddad is Carlos grandmother's maiden name that belongs to his dad (Julian.) The section is not clear enough but if you re-read it you will see that this is true and that based on this logic Helú is his dad's WIFE'S maiden name. eGGz (talk) 05:16, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CompUSA[edit]

There were two mentions of CompUSA in the "Achievements" section of the article. Together, they seemed redundant. The un-cited one implied that CompUSA still exists. I removed that one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.200.171.125 (talk) 05:29, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dry goods store[edit]

Julián established a dry goods store called La Estrella del Oriente (Star of the Orient) in 1911 and purchased...

If he was born in 1940, how did he establish a store in 1911? Can someone verify the correct year? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Azmurath (talk • contribs) 03:25, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Carlos Slim's father, Julián, established a dry goods store in 1911. Carlos Slim was born in 1940. Jim Michael (talk) 16:18, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Telmex[edit]

Carlos Salinas de Gortari (Ex-president of Mexico)is behind all of this, best friend and business partner of Mr.Carlos Slim Helu TELMEX was a successful government company in Mexico, but once Salinas was running Mexico like a President, one of his wonderful ideas was sell this government company to his best friend Mr. Slim to make it 100% private company, after that, Slim became in one of the most richest guys in the entire world, and is important to say the next, in Mexico if you don't have a contract or agreement to get telecommunication services with TELMEX you will be uncommunicated, and just for the monopoly, yeah... you can't get telecommunication services with other company because other company doesn't even exist, the only choice is TELMEX, and if you've got phone service in Mexico is just with TELMEX, and is the only one telecommunication services provider in the entire Mexican nation. And you know why *CURRUPTION*and*MONOPOLY* Imagine if you and your buddies running a company to supply in your country whatever and the government helps you to shutdown all the competitors to make you the only one provider in the entire nation. What do you think going to happen, you wont be rich, you will be trillionare, right. That's what it was with Mr. Slim and Mr. Salinas. Mr. Slim is one of the richest guys in the world and owns TELMEX the only one provider of telecommunication services in the Mexican nation and he is so grateful and thankful to have a his best friend as a business partner Mr.Carlos Salinas. TELMEX was sold just for a few pesos in the 90's, approved by Mr. Salinas who was the president in that time. TELMEX is a multimillionaire company. When TELMEX was operated and owned by the Mexican government the profit were designated to strength the Mexican economy. Now then, Mr. Salinas and Mr. Slim are living la vida loca, joining the pleasures of their empire made it against the rights of all the mexican —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.112.124.223 (talk) 07:59, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What's your point? You can't put this in an encyclopedic article without reliable sources. This is not the place to discuss whether something is corrupt or a monopoly. SuperChencho (talk) 18:05, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I will remove madcow footnote since corruption and owning Telmex is enough information to explain his fortune. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kangeloux (talk • contribs) 22:44, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lebanese[edit]

Where in the manual of style does it say not to mention a person's origin? His parents are both Lebanese and his wife is Lebanese, so how Mexican is he really? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.42.180.106 (talk) 03:41, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

from Wikipedia:Manual of Style_(biographies)#Opening paragraph:
The opening paragraph should give:
Nationality –
  1. In the normal case this will mean the country of which the person is a citizen or national, or was a citizen when the person became notable.
  2. Ethnicity should generally not be emphasized in the opening unless it is relevant to the subject's notability.
bogdan (talk) 22:11, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Mexican is not an ethnicity, rather a nationality, If you are born in Mexico, you are Mexican. Slim is Lebanese Mexican. For example if a Mexican is born in the USA, he would be called Mexican American.
Right, so the lead should say Lebanese Mexican, not just Mexican, just as Oscar de la Hoya's article calls him Mexican American.
I corrected that article as well. bogdan (talk) 22:56, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I am OK with that, unless anyone else has any objections and reasons for those objections.
Even if you say you are a "French-American", you are an American, period. No difference with this... His father went to Mexico and he and his large family are all Mexicans. He is a Mexican businessman. Donald Trump's article does not say he is a "German-American businessman". It says he is an American businessman. C.Kent87 (talk) 06:52, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
it was mentioned that he is christian. I think it is enough without(non muslim) and he is loved for what ever is his religion. Bravo for him, and thanks to his parents Lebanese for bringing him to life. god bless.
I, for one, wondered why the article provided his name in Arabic until I saw that he was a Maronite and assumed he was Lebanese. Papna (talk) 05:21, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wasn't his father an Assyrian who fled Mardin in Turkey to Lebanon? Is he Maronite or syriac-orthodox? —Preceding unsigned comment added by MichoOthuroyo (talk • contribs) 15:07, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't it make the most sense to just open the article with "Mexican of Lebanese descent" or "Lebanese-Mexican"? I understand that he's very wealthy and that his adoptive country wants to take credit for him but it's kind of silly to argue about something that has such a simple solution. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.246.164.142 (talk) 03:05, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think y'all are getting a bit worked up over this. This is like saying that Marco Rubio should be classified as Cuban-American or Colin Powell as Jamaican-American (they're simply referred to as "American"). "Mexican" is a nationality, not ethnicity and like these articles, ethnicity and other details can go to the body paragraph. FYI, he doesn't even have Lebanese citizenship. (N0n3up (talk) 04:35, 8 August 2016 (UTC))[reply]

Can we please stop calling tycoons philanthropists?[edit]

I guess people get paid for that but lets just delete it for the sake of truth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.189.220.32 (talk) 12:56, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Philanthropist". "Philanthropy is the act of donating money, goods, services, time and/or effort to support a socially beneficial cause, with a defined objective and with no financial or material reward to the donor." Does being extremely wealthy somehow disqualify one from committing philanthropy as well? --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 15:57, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Having your wealth come from a parasitic government-sanctioned monopoly that sucks the wealth from a captive market does disqualify one from “loving men". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.189.241.105 (talk) 09:32, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, it doesn't. One can be both a vile oligarch and a lover of men. It's not a black-and-white world. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 16:48, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The money he donates gets back into his pockets due to the reducton of taxes --Scandza (talk) 03:44, 7 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Using the definition above, pretty much every single person on Wikipedia should be describes as a philantropist. Who hasn't, after all, given away money, goods, services or time? Looking at the numbers here, it seems even I myself is a bigger philantropist than Slim, donating a larger percentage of my money than him. Calling him a philantropist is like listing Obama as "president and basket ball player". Yes, he does on occasion play some basket ball, but no, that's not an accurate desription of the man nor what he does.

It really reads like something his PR people put in there, and that's quite possibly what happend. Of all the things Slim can be desribes as to some degree or another, philantropist does NOT warrant a mention in the first paragraph. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.213.72.41 (talk) 14:11, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree with that completely -- Bill Gates, for instance, is certainly a philanthropist but sponsoring a few sports teams doesn't qualify you as one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.129.35.58 (talk) 06:21, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

He violently reduced a whole town to rubble with the purpose of building an open-sky mine and make himself richer. Definitively NOT a philanthropist. If you read Spanish you can read about it here: http://www.vanguardia.com.mx/articulo/la-historia-de-como-carlos-slim-hundio-un-pueblo — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.106.111.98 (talk) 06:04, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Since virtually all magnates donate something out anyway, it can be justified that “magnate” includes “philantrophist” either way. Hence philanthropy can be removed at will in my opinion, to reduce trivial information. ToniTurunen (talk) 12:39, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Personal life[edit]

There should be a section on his personal life. There are reports that he is dating Princess Nour of Jordan.Пипумбрик (talk) 03:32, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poverty rate and GDP per capita[edit]

The 50% of Mexico lives under poverty is poorly sourced- please see this http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/HDI_2008_EN_Tables.pdf on page 33, its 4.8%, if you can prove otherwise I will have to delete some of the data, same goes for GDP per Capita, we both know its higher. My info is from the Human Develpment indices developed by United Nations, where yours is from Business Week. Jesusmariajalisco (talk) 20:20, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

This crap of 50% of Mexico living under poverty is nothing but propaganda and the typical example of how Americans are always trying to portray Mexico as the mos forlorn place on Earth. Please don't post this kind of rubbish without proper sources. Economic Inequality remains higher in other so-called prosperous countries such as Chile but as I see many people are happy relying on stereotypes and received ideas rather than on hard facts.--129.102.254.253 (talk) 13:46, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've already found a better source, so the 50% figure has been changed to the United nations world bank figure of 17%. Jesusmariajalisco (talk) 18:47, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is Business Week a reliable source?
In any case, I would suggest that instead of just deleting sourced material, you could re-word the sentence to convey the message of disparity that the souce is trying to show.
By the way, the link you're providing says 17.6% (See under National poverty line)
Likeminas (talk) 20:44, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But you are using the $2 or less a day from Business week which is 4.8, 17.6% do live under poverty, so we can use that one as well. How would you suggest we word the section? Jesusmariajalisco (talk) 20:47, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I changed the figures to the ones provided by the IMF and UN respectively.
Likeminas (talk) 22:52, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the update Likeminas Jesusmariajalisco (talk) 22:57, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism[edit]

This article is getting vandalized. Please lock it if the vandalism continues. Thanks. 174.16.163.180 (talk) 05:14, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't set the locking expiration date. This will get vandalized no matter what. Lock this indefinitely. There aren't a lot of new info to be added here. Also the lock box on the top i think is not needed. 174.16.189.135 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 05:53, 11 March 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Locking this forever is absurd and against wikipedia philosophy. This locked version is in no way the eternal truth. For example, a good argument is made that listing Slim as a philantropist in the first paragraph is - if not wrong by strict definition - misleading, suspect and that at the very least it is not worthy of such an early mention. The criticism section is curiously short, and about a third of it simply describes Slim's own feelings about criticisms and the growth of his own wealth. He gets the last word even in this section, so to say. Not an article to be poud of, this. --80.213.72.41 (talk) 14:22, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You should be on the lookout.. Those top two comments are from the same ISP and most probably the same user just getting his/her/their ip refreshed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.132.116.222 (talk) 01:36, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tonight's usage of Carlos Slim's own website for citations[edit]

I am not entirely sure that using the article's website for citations fits reliable sources. He should be receiving lots of reliable third-party neutral sources now because of today's announcement. --Morenooso (talk) 06:35, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Slim's wife DOB[edit]

How can she have been born in 1967, is their son Carlos was born in 1966? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.44.93.16 (talk) 07:20, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The numbers next to her in the infobox are of course the timeframe for their marraige (which it what's most relevant when it comes to someone's spouse, not their DOB/DOD). And the article itself also mentions the details, i.e. they were married from 1967 until her death in 1999 Nil Einne (talk) 14:23, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not Fortune, but Forbes[edit]

In the personal wealth section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.44.93.16 (talk) 07:22, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Are you referring to the statement "On August 8, 2007, Fortune reported that [...]"? In that case I think it is not an error, it is really Fortune magazine that is intended, see this CNN article, which happens to be the reference that is used in the article. Andreas Willow (talk) 19:52, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What he is known for:[edit]

In 2010 he became the "World's wealthiest man alive." And that push Bill Gates back one step along with many toher billionaires. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.75.80.133 (talk) 02:28, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Carlos Slim (pictured) becomes the first non-American to top Forbes’ list of billionaires since 1994[edit]

What about the quote?

On August 8, 2007, Fortune reported that Slim had overtaken Gates as the world's richest man. Slim's estimated fortune soared to US$59 billion, based on the value of his public holdings the end of July. Gates' net worth was estimated to be at least US$58 billion.[7][9]

A clear contradiction... 173.168.177.217 (talk) 01:40, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Afraid it isn't so clear. Everything in that quote seems perfectly reasonable. 75.57.226.216 (talk) 05:28, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The point the person is making is how could it be current news that

"Carlos Slim (pictured) becomes the first non-American to top Forbes’ list of billionaires since 1994."

when the article clearly states that

"On August 8, 2007, Fortune reported that Slim had overtaken Gates as the world's richest man. Slim's estimated fortune soared to US$59 billion, based on the value of his public holdings the end of July. Gates' net worth was estimated to be at least US$58 billion.[7][9]"

If he is the current (March 13, 2010) richest man in the world (according to Forbes), then he is the richest non-American to do so since August8, 2007, the last time he (a non-American) topped the list. Certainly a clear contradiction. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.120.195.191 (talk) 10:28, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Surely having Mexican nationality means he is American, even if he is of Lebanese decent, that is a contradiction too. 77.103.91.26 (talk) 00:39, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What? OK. American is usually meant to say he is a citizen of the United States. Slim is a Mexican citizen. Also, as already stated above, Mexican is not an ethnicity, it's a nationality. He is Lebanese, not Hispanic. SuperChencho (talk) 18:12, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to me that he was born in Mexico and is a Mexican citizen. That makes him Mexican, not Lebanese. Lebanese is a nationality and not an ethnicity.Cillmore (talk) 15:08, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

He was born in Mexico. Ergo, he is Mexican. While he may be descended from Lebanese parents, his nationality for the lead paragraph is Mexican as per Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(biographies)#Opening_paragraph. Nationality at time of notability is the only one used. Ethnicity is not used. Lebanese is both a nationality and ethnicity. In his case, he is descended from Lebanon. Therefore he has Lebanese ethnicity. On Wikipedia, in the opening paragraph he can only be listed as Mexican. Hope this helps--Morenooso (talk) 15:17, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Regardless of whether he is Mexican or Lebanese, he is definitely not American. There is definitely a problem stating he was the richest man in the world in 2007, and then 2 points down stating that it has been 16 years since a non-American has been the richest in the world. 2007 was not 16 years ago. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Double0three (talk • contribs) 13:48, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Who?[edit]

I move for deletion of

According to Professor Celso Garrido, an economist at the Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Slim's domination of his country's conglomerates chokes off growth of smaller companies, resulting in a shortage of good jobs and driving many Mexicans to seek better lives north of the Rio Grande.

reasons: 1) Celso Garrido is UNKNOWN. 2) One sentence parragraph 3) No citattions. 4) Obviously monopoly curtails growth regardless of Celso's opinion. 5) Not every company owned by Slim is a monopoly. 6) Telephone hard lines are a natural monopoly (so there is no way out). 7) Probably written by Celso Garrido. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.70.20.97 (talk) 18:16, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Celso Garrido is not unknown. See es:Celso Garrido Noguera. Fridek (talk) 18:34, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
re 6) telephone services have been unbundled in the uk, and there is a lot of competition. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.233.95.90 (talk) 02:17, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Net worth[edit]

The info bar on the right hand side says his estimated net worth is 74 billion. What is the source for this? I've never seen his net worth estimated quite that high before and I am wondering where that figure came from. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.228.202.171 (talk) 23:37, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

People keep messing with that number. I've just put it back to the figure of 53,5bn of 2010 which has a source (BBC/Forbes). If anyone changes this without providing a citation then I'll revert their change. - Sitush (talk) 15:48, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Another question about his net worth--it is cited here that he is the wealthiest man in the world, yet his net worth is recorded as $53.5 billion and Bill Gates's is recorded as $54 billion. Jroberts.757 (talk) 21:37, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, please can you sign your posts - use 4 tildes (~). I don't know where you have got your $54bn for Gates from but the article's 53.5bn for Slim, and the comment that he was the wealthiest person, relies on reports in 2010 from Forbes and the BBC. I rather think that the BBC is recycling material from Forbes but the point remains that there is a point of reference for the figure and the statement made. Things change, but without a citation it should not be used. Does this make sense to you? - Sitush (talk) 04:39, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I got my figure for his net worth from Wikipedia's Bill Gates article. Jroberts.757 (talk) 21:37, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You cannot use that - see WP:Circular. - Sitush (talk) 21:40, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I understand. I will take my comments to the Bill Gates talk page and point out they have made a mistake. I was pointing that out here too, and I guess I shouldn't have. Jroberts.757 (talk) 21:42, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The Gates page may not be wrong. It depends what date they are talking of - it should make the date clear. Furthermore, it is possible for two sources to present different outcomes, although I think it unlikely in this instance. I haven't got time to check the detail on the Gates page right now but feel free. What you can say with certainty is that there are sources saying Slim > Gates in early 2010 and if the Gates page says otherwise AND is cited, then both that page and this one need to reflect the fact that there is a contradiction in reporting. Ok? - Sitush (talk) 21:45, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hatnotes[edit]

It seems the hatnotes about his name (Spanish name Slim Helu, Arabic name Salim) could be incorporated into the article. -98.210.150.163 (talk) 03:46, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For what purpose? Are they not clear enough? - Sitush (talk) 11:22, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lebanese ethnicity[edit]

I have reverted some edits attempting, somewhat awkwardly, to introduce the fact of Lebanese ethnicity into the main body of the article. Just for clarification, as promised in my edit summary:

  • there is a declaration and link in the infobox
  • there are numerous Lebanese categories listed at the bottom of the article
  • his ethnicity is made clear in the detail of his early life and that of his father

Given that Slim is nearly always referred to as a Mexican & he has defined himself as such, it would constitute undue weight to introduce yet more references to his ethnicity. His ethnicity is, in fact, not a matter of great importance to most people (although it seems to be for some at the moment, perhaps being people from the Lebanon who have heard of him after the recent Forbes announcement). Does anyone disagree massively with this? - Sitush (talk) 22:32, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are to some degree correct and there is not need for link to Lebanon or Lebanese people. But I think it is a good idea to leave it as it was before my edit. "is a Mexican business magnate of Lebanese ethnicity" ot simply "is a Mexican-Lebanese business magnate" in order not to break the sentence as you mentioned previously. The reason is that even though he is seen as Mexican, in reality he is Lebanese from his father and also mother side. "his father, Julián Slim Haddad, emigrated from Lebanon to Mexico" and "Carlos' mother, Linda Helú, was born in Parral, Chihuahua, Mexico to Lebanese immigrants." Because of all these I think the best way is ""is a Mexican-Lebanese business magnate".

22:42, 11 March 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gsfhsahopenclerk (talk • contribs)

Thanks for contributing to this discussion.You may know more about this issue than me. Does he have dual nationality? Does he refer to himself as Mexican-Lebanese? Can you provide any examples? I realise that you are a new contributor and you may feel that I am being tendentious about this - sorry for that. This is a "biography of a living person" and as such special care has to be taken. WP:BLP covers the area & it may be worth you reading that article. But I am open to correction etc. My big concern is that this article has frequently been subject to all sorts of odd edits that are either without any proof or simply not relevant. I do not mean to cast aspersions but it seems to me that many of these peculiarities have some sort of origin in nationalistic pride (not necessarily Lebanese) or in a desire to find some sort of fault in the man. Wikipedia exists on the fundamentals of verifiability, notability, reliability and "neutral point of view". There are loads of other policies and guidelines but the end result is that we have to be particularly careful with BLPs.
Anyway, feel free to provide some examples here on the talk page and if you then need any help in presenting them in the article itself I will be happy to assist.
I'll take a look back through the article history because, as you say, there probably has been a mention of this before in the lead section and perhaps it was better phrased. Or perhaps it was removed as being not significant/undue weight or whatever. Any information you might provide might, of course, alter whatever the situation had been previously. So go for it! <g> - Sitush (talk) 01:18, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks that you welcome me in the new world of Wikipedia as a new user. I found one very important information information. Just see the quote taken from his own website http://www.carlosslim.com/reconocimiento_beirut_ing.html "March 14: Mr. Slim went to Jezzine, south Lebanon, his parents’ birth place, and visited their home."

It means that not only his father is Lebanese born but also his mother is Lebanese born. Both of them born in the city of Jezzine.

Moreover this next quote and also photos show that he is publicly recognizing his present connection with Lebanon. "The President of Lebanon, Mr. Michel Sleiman, did honor Mr. Carlos Slim by awarding him the Lebanese Gold Order to Merit, while the Jezzine Municipal Government did name him Honorific Citizen. Beirut, Lebanon, March 12, 2010. Mr. Carlos Slim has been honored by the government of Lebanon by awarding him the Lebanese Gold Order to Merit in Beirut, where he recently stood to meet several public functionaries. The President of Lebanon, Mr. Michel Sleiman, did praise Mr. Slim entrepreneurial career and did thank him by honoring Lebanon’s name in the whole world. "

One more quote from http://www.carlosslim.com/reconocimiento_libano_ing.html "Our Mexican-Lebanese community has particularly enjoyed, many times, his significant contribution in charity and humanitarian projects." Therefore he see himself as a member of the Mexican-Lebanese or Lebanese-Mexican community in Mexico.

Moreover, this quote shows that he is involved in some charity activities in Lebanon. "When the destructive and bloody war of Israel against Lebanon on the summer of 2006, Don Carlos demonstrated his great worry and consideration for the situation and urgently and efficiently offered all the possible humanitarian help to the needy victims in Lebanon.

In the former school year, thousands of Lebanese students, received from the Carlos Slim Foundation, hundreds of computers at their public schools in towns of different regions of Lebanon."

And not on the last place he included his family origin in his official website http://www.carlosslim.com/biografia_ing.html

In conclusion, I think he considers himself to be Lebanese-Mexican. Therefore we have to keep it this way and if you can to stop to be vandalized his Wikipedia page.

Gsfhsahopenclerk (talk) 00:29, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What you think is of no significance, and your deductions above fail the synthesis/original research tests - we need a straight-out statement from somewhere reliable. Unless you can verify his nationality as being dual, he stays a Mexican here. - Sitush (talk) 00:47, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To be a Lebanese-Mexican you do not need dual nationality. Do you thing that all Italian-Americans are Italian and American citizens? But they are called Italian-Americans because they have Italian family/ethnic background. And moreover, all of the information comes from Carlos Slim's own website and therefore it is the most reliable source possible. Gsfhsahopenclerk (talk) 00:54, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

But [1] here it says his mother was born in Mexico. I already have doubts about the over-reliance on his self-published biography, and now we have a proof that it is not great. I'll do some digging but suspect there is a translation issue. I'm still not happy about describing him as Lebanese-Mexican. - Sitush (talk) 01:04, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

":But [2] here it says his mother was born in Mexico. I already have doubts about the over-reliance on his self-published biography, and now we have a proof that it is not great." That is looking really strange. Then it seems that even he does not know where his mother was born ;)

"I'm still not happy about describing him as Lebanese-Mexican." It is simple just think about the example I gave you. Not every Italian-American, Italian-Canadian, Italian-Australian, Italian-Brazilian or Italian-Argentine has a dual citizenship. It is simply based on ethnicity/family background.

Gsfhsahopenclerk (talk) 01:12, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. Still original research, IMO. - Sitush (talk) 01:18, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
And please revert your last edit. My edit summary, and my comment above (with reference), explains why. - Sitush (talk) 01:21, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The awkwardness of the article reflects Sitush's (and other) obsession with calling Carlos simply "a Mexican". The opening paragraph repeatedly calls him Mexican and talks about Mexico and in the very next paragraph it says that he's 100% Lebanese. It just looks awkward and political right away. Why not just call the guy Lebanese-Mexican (ala African-American)? Sitush has neglected to support his argument and instead repeatedly stated things like "I'm not happy with it", "IMO", and "what you think doesn't matter". Those aren't worthy arguments and don't belong here. You have to come up with something better than "no I don't like it" to remove content and replace it with nothing. I thought Wikipedia was supposed to live up to academic standards rather than be a place for Aztlan nationalists to "claim" people.
I think y'all are getting a bit worked up over this. This is like saying that Marco Rubio should be classified as Cuban-American or Colin Powell as Jamaican-American (they're simply referred to as "American"). "Mexican" is a nationality, not ethnicity and like these articles, ethnicity and other details can go to the body paragraph. FYI, he doesn't even have Lebanese citizenship. (N0n3up (talk) 04:36, 8 August 2016 (UTC))[reply]

Maronite Christian vs Maronite Catholic[edit]

First up, I'm not particularly knowledgeable about religious terminology. I am aware that the phrase "Maronite Christian" had been a static entry in this article's infobox for quite some time but recent edits have seen it changed back and forth between that & "Maronite Catholic".

Reading the Maronite article, and risking falling foul of using a circular reference, it is clear that the Maronites are some sort of branch of the Catholic faith. However, learned articles favour the term "Maronite Christian" by quite a margin, and until this recent spat it was the only term I'd heard of myself (not that the latter means much, I guess). Using Google Scholar - Catholic (276 hits), Christian (1,060 hits). A straight Google search, which of course includes a lot of dupes/drill downs etc, paints a different picture.

Personally, I'd rather take the academic line on this because the academic community usually have a good reason for using a certain terminology and tend to reach their own consensus regarding it, whereas the popular line often does tend to be swayed by POV etc. However, I would appreciate input from other contributors. Neither term really "breaks" the article, unless Slim himself prefers one or the other ... and, oddly enough, I'm pretty sure that I have seen more interviews with him which use the "Christian" version, so I'll do some digging on this. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 02:14, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Recent page protection[edit]

Yet another bout of edit warring on this article has resulted in the page being protected for a while, which is something I predicted might be necessary a few weeks ago. In an attempt to move things forward can I propose that:

  1. we revert to the situation which excludes his ethnicity from the lead, as is WP convention and as was settled for a long time until recently. It seems to me that there is a small group of POV-pushers who return here periodically in an attempt - which seems sometimes to be a concert party, and is often triggered by one particular person - to get the information in that section. These contributors know that the information is already in the article but want to give it more prominence. His ethnicity is not significant to his achievements/notability. He did not get to his position in the world because of his ethnicity, but his country of birth and residence is an important factor in his "achievements". I have little doubt that he probably has used contacts in the Lebanese ex-pat business world etc to advance his position but in the scale of things these contacts do not feature much at all - he makes very little comment about them himself, aside from occasional visits to the country, and so if he does not attach much weight to it then why should we?
  2. we in fact leave the lead well alone until something significant changes, eg: his "official" wealth figure is revalued or he sells the big holding in the communications businesses
  3. we concentrate on finding alternative sources for information and also resolving the black hole of where he got the money in his early life which enabled him to set up a multi-million business in a matter of a year or so (his parents did well financially, but not that well). Surely these things are far more important than silly squabbles about something which is already present and not in dispute as a fact? I massively expanded the article recently, and fixed numerous problems, but it is still woefully lacking. Using his own published web biography is acceptable per WP:SELFPUB but I've already found discrepancies in his self-published statements - one of which is noted in a previous discussion above. There is a real problem sourcing information about this guy because much of the knowledge that is out there is derived from press releases etc and so is "sort of" self-published anyway. Furthermore, much of that which remains is often POV stuff: people being either sycophantic or purposely denigratory. However, the issue needs resolving

Carlos is a Mexian with Syriac/Aramaic ethnic, beccause the Maronits are a Syriacs from the Syriac Church who was splitted before long ago. Its time that all this Maronits to say we are indeed Arameans in the roots and in the blood! Dont forget it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.238.193.121 (talk) 19:10, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

... and your point in relation to my proposal and the article is? - Sitush (talk) 19:41, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Religion of Slim's parents[edit]

Why is the religion of Slim's parents relevant here? Furthermore, do we know his mother's religion? There have been some edits today that have, frankly, made a bit of a mess of things, well intentioned although they may have been. Some of the phrasing is now extremely clumsy. - Sitush (talk) 16:35, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I hope there isn't a problem. The religion of the mother is in the cites, both 4 and 5, which you deleted and then I restored (after you had requested a cite to the parents' religion when you had deleted that information earlier, which was promptly provided within hours). The religion of his parents is relevant as it narrows his family's cultural heritage. For those of Lebanese descent such information is extremely important due to the country's rich cultural and religious heritage and various ancestries. Please explain more clearly the problem, as everything is verifiable, relevant and informative? I'm open to hearing what other editors have to say about this so it's just not a one-sided thing as these edits the past few hours have been, but it seems a pretty uncontroversial point! If the wording is clumsy, feel free to change it, but it doesn't make sense to delete information cited from both the Times of London and Time Magazine, both obviously reputable sources that found such information relevant to their readers. I don't want to dominate the discussion, so that's it for me :) But please let's reach some consensus before reverting again and deleting cites if that is okay. Sincerely, Otherperson2011 (talk) 16:36, 17 June 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Otherperson2011 (talk • contribs)

There was consensus at one point about all of this. My edit where I requested a citation was for the statement that he is a Maronite Christian. As far as my other edit goes, well, I admit that my edit summary was poor. However, the religion of his parents is totally tangential. What Lebanese people think about it simply does not matter if it has no real bearing on the article's subject. This has been discussed time and again on this talk page. - Sitush (talk) 16:46, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any of that discussion here "time and again" on the talk page. Can you direct me to it?

I don't want to get into a drawn out discussion as your tone is a bit unsettling but my last response is that; I didn't do anything about his religion, that has not been verified in any source I have read and listing that in such a situation would obviously be problematic for a biography of a living person. I made no changes for that, which I assume you had addressed earlier in your edits. His parents' religions, though, have been verified by a number of sources. I listed both Times (London) because it references the mother's religion as well "born of Lebanese Christian parents" and Time Magazine because it lists the specific rite of the father (Maronite Christian) because you had deleted the references and a previous cite for not clearly stating the religion of either. If we want to nitpick as to whether the mother is in fact Maronite Christian, that is one thing and that is something that can be edited to be more clear or we can try to see what other sources say about that. But to claim that the parents' religions are irrelevant can only be made by someone who knows nothing about Mexico, Lebanon, the Arab world or best practices in Wikipedia biographies of living persons. But I would to hear what other editors have to say so this does not become a one-sided thing. I have no right to dominate the discussion, just as you, so perhaps we should stick to what is verifiable and best practices in the rest of Wikipedia until other editors chime in. Have a good day :) Sincerely, Otherperson2011 (talk) 16:49, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Otherperson2011" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Otherperson2011 (talk • contribs) 16:51, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is all tied up with the stuff about ethnicity. I would point out that even Slim does not mention the religion of his parents (or indeed of himself) in his bio page. - Sitush (talk) 17:01, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

info[edit]

send me a buisness of him — Preceding unsigned comment added by A304796096 (talk • contribs) 02:54, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keen to learn Laiminm (talk) 13:40, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pronunciation of "Slim"[edit]

Should the name "Slim" be pronounced /es'lin/ - with a final en rather than em, according to Spanish phonology which does not allow a final em? TomS TDotO (talk) 16:53, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have been informed that the standard pronunciation is nowadays /es'lim/. But still there is the epenthetic /e/ at the beginning. TomS TDotO (talk) 18:44, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
We need a source for that. Spanish does not allow any other nasal consonant than /n/ in this position. This /n/ is only bilabial if a bilabial consonant follows. Sol505000 (talk) 20:07, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Please add examples here of other -im words that are pronounced as if they were spelled -in.
Else everybody thinks somebody made a big mistake. Jidanni (talk) 13:26, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Jidanni: Spanish phonology is the place for that, not this article. The information is there. Sol505000 (talk) 14:50, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
if not /slim/, it should be /e'slim/ Carlos Slim | 30 pronunciations of Carlos Slim in Spanish (youglish.com). final /m/ is less common than /n/, but not unallowed Listado de lemas que terminan en «m» | Diccionario de la lengua española | RAE - ASALE, «am»,«em», «im», «om», «um». Brawlio (talk) 01:20, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Spanish words[edit]

You might want to get your Spanish expert to check this entry over. I think you will find that "jeripollas" is probably not what you thought it was, whatever that might have been. That word does not appear in the Spanish version of the entry for Slim; the Spanish entry is quite a bit different. MaxwellPerkins (talk) 01:35, 17 June 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by MaxwellPerkins (talk • contribs) 01:31, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Honorary Titles"[edit]

What in the world is this doing in the article? "World's Richest Man" is an estimate given by Forbes magazine or other commercial ventures. It doesn't "honor" anything. MaxwellPerkins (talk) 01:57, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An honorary title is granted by some body with competence and authority, usually in recognition of service or merit. The Honorary Consul for Finland in Nicaragua, for instance, might be granted to a person who has shown interest in Finnish affairs while living in Nicaragua or to a Finnish citizen living in Nicaragua who could represent Finland on ceremonial occasions. While getting rich is an achievement or an accomplishment, we usually don't associate civic merit with it, nor service, unless it's in service of Mammon.MaxwellPerkins (talk) 22:46, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Richer than Bill Gates[edit]

All you have to do is go to Forbes and Slim is above Gates. That sentence about Gates should be removed from the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stubborn Myth (talk • contribs) 17:48, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Forbes ranking is from March; fluctuations in Mr. Gates' holdings can cause significant swings. A more up to date ranking can be found here. One bad day for MSFT stock and you'll be right again. Kuru (talk) 00:07, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

monopolist[edit]

2601:6:6F00:538:19E1:8481:3E48:9F70, I think the term monopolist should be carved out + sourced in the body of the page rather than merely dropped with 3 old bare links in the top line. I am not against the suggestion, but to me it smells a little lazy / and attention-seeking. Complete the sources via the dropdown menu ( with dates titles, you know?) discuss them in the body - Lede should leave without references, as lede follows body.--Wuerzele (talk) 03:20, 4 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As this is a WP:BLP, it will need to be meticulously sourced and proven; not just op-ops and insinuation. No objections to a well-sourced paragraph outlining the material in the body, but this is far from a defining characteristic to place in the lede at this point. Kuru (talk) 11:58, 4 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

corrected links[edit]

Footnotes 39 and 51 are broken. The correct links for the original pages are: Footnote 39, For general criticism of the Telecom monopoly: http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/hdrp_2010_09.pdf

Footnote 51, how much Slim owns of the telecom company: http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/stories/2007-03-04/slims-big-giveaway I could not see any way to edit it, so am adding it here. 89.240.242.168 (talk) 07:01, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Real time net worth[edit]

Is it possible to automatically change the net worth to whatever it says here http://www.forbes.com/billionaires/list/#version:realtime or can it only be done manually --88.111.129.157 (talk) 19:59, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup/Issue tags[edit]

I made some bold edits to fix what I think are some real problems with the article. I also added some issue templates. I still think there are tons of peacock statements left. A good chunk of this article reads like a press release promoting him, not an encyclopedia. Also his business career section really should be trimmed down. Transactions details for all of those acquisitions really aren't necessary. Handpolk (talk) 13:40, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well while you are at it you might check the claims of his contacts with Jebb Bush for Barkleys& Perhaps Lehmans, before and after the2008 crash ~ and did he loose money by that? VIZ:- Jeb Bush's Big Lehman Brothers Problem ~ Charles Gasparino, The Daily Beast ~ Gasparino writes: "If Jeb won't tell you what Jeb exactly did while working on Wall Street, in the interests of transparency and disclosure, I will try."

A spokeswoman for Bush declined to provide specifics about his work for the banks other than point to various media accounts, including those by this reporter. But Bush, according to people with direct knowledge of his activities, helped the firm look for business from well-heeled clients, including everyone from hedge funds to billionaire investors like Carlos Slim Helu, the Mexican business magnate widely regarded as the world’s richest man.--113.187.0.226 (talk) 06:01, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Jeb Bush is not mentioned in this article. I'm not sure what you're asking for. Handpolk ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 06:34, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Blacklisted Links Found on Carlos Slim[edit]

Cyberbot II has detected links on Carlos Slim which have been added to the blacklist, either globally or locally. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed or are highly inappropriate for Wikipedia. The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed. Alternatively, you may request that the link is removed from or altered on the blacklist locally or globally. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. Please do not remove the tag until the issue is resolved. You may set the invisible parameter to "true" whilst requests to white-list are being processed. Should you require any help with this process, please ask at the help desk.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

  • http://yourstory.com/2015/05/carlos-slim-quotes/
    Triggered by \byourstory\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:33, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wealth / ranking[edit]

Well, it seems that the wealth estimate is going to flip between two sources, so it's probably a good idea to have a discussion and set a consensus on what to use.

  • Forbes real-time estimate is currently pegged at $51.2 (includes "family"). This changes frequently, but is the most up-to-date.
  • Forbes 500, annually created list. Had Carlos at $77.1 (note this includes the "and family") part.
  • Business Insider 50 Richest] list. Claims he has "...already begun distributing billions of his fortune to his family as part of his estate planning..." and has the number at $23.5 which is a significant difference.

At the moment the article shows 51.6 and sourced to the BI article, which is obviously mis-matched and unacceptable. BI is, frankly, a little sketchy at times - more of the TMZ of business news. I have no idea how they would be separating the family wealth. Forbes is the usual standard on most articles, and has a long term reputation for doing these "art based" estimates. Any other thoughts? Kuru (talk) 23:58, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

After a week with no other responses, I've reverted the source to Forbes' real time estimation, which is actually 48.9 now. Kuru (talk) 02:19, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 7 external links on Carlos Slim. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:01, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Accusations of influencing the 2016 US presidential election[edit]

In the "criticism" subsection, I added,

  • "During the 2016 United States presidential election, Slim was criticized by Republican nominee Donald Trump for trying to help Hillary Clinton's campaign by publishing false allegations of sexual misconduct in The New York Times, where Slim is a major shareholder.("Trump accuses Mexico's Carlos Slim of trying to help Clinton". Reuters. October 14, 2016. Retrieved October 17, 2016.)".
The short paragraph, referenced with an article from Reuters, was removed twice. It seems to me that being criticized for influencing the US presidential election is sufficiently significant to be included in a "criticism" subsection. What seems to be the problem please?Zigzig20s (talk) 23:51, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The wording is an issue, as instead of "X accused Y of Z" you're stating "Y was criticized by X for doing Z", which implies acceptance of the fact of Z by Wikipedia. Acroterion (talk) 23:55, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Not at all. I did not say, "And Wikipedia agrees." Wikipedia is simply relaying the information from Reuters.Zigzig20s (talk) 00:02, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You didn't say that, but your preferred wording asserts ("...for trying to help") that Slim tried to help in Wikipedia's voice, rather than stating that Trump accused Slim of doing so. Rephrasing to reflect that would deal with the issue from my perspective. "Trump accused Slim of trying to help Clinton by..." correctly attributes the accusation in its entirety to Trump. Acroterion (talk) 00:13, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
How would you like to rephrase the whole thing please? We can't make it sound like Trump is wrong; he could be right, nobody knows for sure. I thought my initial phrasing was NPOV. Maybe we could just say, "allegedly trying"?Zigzig20s (talk) 00:52, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
We simply repeat what Trump is stating without worrying if he's correct or not. "During the 2016 United States presidential election, Republican nominee Donald Trump claimed Slim was trying to help Hillary Clinton's campaign by publishing false allegations of sexual misconduct in The New York Times, where Slim is a major shareholder." This is why we avoid the passive voice. Acroterion (talk) 01:08, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I think "claimed" sounds POV. Why not "suggested" instead?Zigzig20s (talk) 01:11, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
"Claimed" is the preferred wording all over Wikipedia for unproven assertions: that's its literal meaning. "Suggested" is sort of passive-voice-sounding as well, sounding kind of waffly. Acroterion (talk) 01:15, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Can you please point to a specific policy regarding "claimed"? I'm sorry but I feel like it would sound as if Wikipedia were challenging Trump's suggestion/contention.Zigzig20s (talk) 01:20, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
WP:CLAIM tends to support your position.. Can't say I agree with it, but there you go. "Said" seems awfully flat, so "suggested" might do. Acroterion (talk) 01:23, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
OK thanks, I've added your version with "suggested" as per consensus.Zigzig20s (talk) 01:31, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I still disagree with this nonsense. We don't need to decorate every BLP in wikipedia with these accusations. If this has legs, then add it later. At the moment, it just seems like a random frivolous swipe, with no follow up. I can't imagine why this would be needed. Kuru (talk) 01:42, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I tend to agree: my main concern in the immediate term was the wording. I also dispute that there's a consensus for inclusion, but I at least wanted to get it written so the attribution comes out correctly. Right now this is on par with Trumps assertions against Rafael Bienvenido Cruz, which haven't stuck in that article because they haven't stuck in real life. Acroterion (talk) 01:49, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
[edit conflict] There seemed to be consensus for inclusion with the new text before you removed it arbitrarily. Do we really need to start an RfC to include this? The US presidential election is pretty significant.Zigzig20s (talk) 01:50, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
See my comment above on consensus. Acroterion (talk) 01:53, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
There's nothing arbitrary about it. This is a WP:BLP, not another one of the political coatracks we use for documenting our favorite political conspiracy theories. If you were unable to gain purchase at Donald Trump sexual misconduct allegations‎, why would you try to add it here? Kuru (talk) 01:56, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Do you not believe that the possibility of trying to influence the US presidential election with libel is a sufficiently significant criticism to be included? The lede in Electoral fraud includes "libel", so I do believe that the criticism, whether it be founded or unfounded, should be included; besides, it comes from Trump, not some deplorable nobody.Zigzig20s (talk) 01:59, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
We're not saying we agree or disagree with Trump's contention. Just relaying the information as Reuters did. By the way, "conspiracy theory" is the Clinton campaign's way to dismiss any and all criticisms. We are simply relaying facts here--Trump's contention. Not taking sides.Zigzig20s (talk) 02:02, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No, I do not accept the premise that every rally accusation in this particular election cycle is worthy of decorating our encyclopedia. If there's some lasting significance to the accusation or some notable escalation of the conflict then I'd be comfortable working out some wording, but this is just silly. Kuru (talk) 02:37, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The comment above by Zigzig20s [3] comes close to advocacy: we should not be describing one set of statements as libellous and a counter-argument as credible. Acroterion (talk) 02:48, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I have zero opinion. Please do not personalize this. My Gosh. This is about reliable third-party sources. Wikipedia editors like you and I are absolute nobodies. But we should not actively try to redact information that is in the mainstream media. If the allegations are untrue, they are the definition of libel as far as I know (which explains Trump's use of the word "rigged"). I agree with you that the allegations should not even be on Wikipedia, because they are not unproven and thus gossip, but since they are here, we need to give the full context.Zigzig20s (talk) 02:53, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Then we agree there's no reason to drag this BLP into your mud pit. Thank you. Kuru (talk) 03:02, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It's not mine. The criticism was made by a fellow billionaire (Trump) and it is not about a trivial detail--it is about a possible attempt to influence the US presidential election. We already have an article about the alleged attempt (the sexual allegations). Do we really need an RfC to include this?Zigzig20s (talk) 03:07, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
From the above your preferred edits here appear to be an outcome of the discussions about the allegations at another article that you were opposing on BLP grounds. I think it's time to remind you that you've been warned about American politics sanctions more than once. Acroterion (talk) 03:10, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
What am I opposing? I don't understand. I am only trying to reach consensus here.Zigzig20s (talk) 03:14, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

<outdent>You appear to be advocating some sort of opposition between Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016 and this article, based on your BLP comments on that talkpage. They're both billionaires, one assertion is false so the other must be true, etc. It looks a lot like you're trying to make a point. Acroterion (talk) 03:21, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand what you're saying, and perhaps you don't understand what I'm saying either. I am only trying to include the information from Reuters. They are not making a point, only providing necessary context. Adding, "During the 2016 United States presidential election, Republican nominee Donald Trump suggested Slim was trying to help Hillary Clinton's campaign by publishing false allegations of sexual misconduct in The New York Times, where Slim is a major shareholder.", is NPOV.Zigzig20s (talk) 03:25, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I do understand what you mean. You were arguing (with moderate success) that that the allegations should not be mentioned at the Trump campaign article, but you're trying to insert a discussion of that here. I'm all in favor of a cautious approach to BLP, but I have concern when I see it apparently being used in a partisan manner, presenting it as a conspiracy and using the word "false" (a word that I'm in favor of when allegations are in fact proven to be false) about allegations that have not been proven either way, and won't be for some time to come. The controversy exists, you appear to have chosen a side. Acroterion (talk) 11:31, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I never believe allegations until someone can prove them right. I don't believe rumors. I only believe in facts. But you are off topic and over-interpreting here. What we want to add to this "criticism" section is simply what Reuters is saying: "During the 2016 United States presidential election, Republican nominee Donald Trump suggested Slim was trying to help Hillary Clinton's campaign by publishing false allegations of sexual misconduct in The New York Times, where Slim is a major shareholder.". Do we need an RfC to add this?Zigzig20s (talk) 15:14, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Reuters is reporting what Trump has alleged. That's different from Reuters making the same assertion on its own, and you appear to grant greater credence to Trump's assertions than to those of others. Acroterion (talk) 16:16, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Only my boyfriend may presume or assume anything about me, because after we fight we can make up. I am only suggesting that we follow Reuters's lead and relay the information, since being criticized for trying to influence the US presidential election by publishing libel (Trump's contention) would seem to be sufficiently significant to appear here.Zigzig20s (talk) 17:20, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Does He Own the New York Times?[edit]

Some say so.

Saw he has 17% of the foundation that runs it - is that a bigger interest than anyone else's? Also, how and why did he get a stake in the USA's biggest paper? 86.148.53.121 (talk) 23:46, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Some" would be factually incorrect. He has a minority interest in a minority class of stocks, essentially 17.4% of class A stocks electing 33% of the board. For control, you'd need to look to the Ochs-Sulzberger family trust, which has 88% of class B which elects 66% of the board. The USA's largest paper is the Wall Street Journal. Kuru (talk) 00:11, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The article statement "The New York Times Company's Class A shares are available for purchase by the public" is incorrect. According to Investopedia "Class A shares are not sold to the public" [4] Wsulek (talk) 21:56, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The article is correct. The NYT class A shares are traded. The class B are not, but can be converted to class A. Investopedia probably needs to be less finite in their language; it's a general vs. specific issue. You can read a decent overview of the NYT class structure intent + drama outlined here. Kuru (talk) 23:05, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ties to Mexican Cartels? Seems noteworthy, although I would never write about this if I lived in Mexico.[edit]

No, I don't think anyone is alleging that the benevolent Mr. Slim directly runs a Cartel, it would seem that as the most powerful man in Mexico, he is a sort of boss of bosses.

I think this should be included in the criticism section, as it has been reported in multiple major media outlets and is sourced from emails exchanged between Stratfor employees and a DEA agent.

http://www.telesurtv.net/english/opinion/The-Mexican-Billionaire-Even-Ex-Presidents-Fear-Talking-About--20151201-0019.html

Burton then asks DEA Special Agent William F. Dionne the question:

"Billy, is the MX billionaire Carlos Slim linked to the narcos?"

Dionne replies, "Regarding your question, the MX telecommunication billionaire is."

https://wikileaks.org/gifiles/docs/86/863970_re-tactical-client-question-carlos-slim-and-cartel-dynamics-.html

"Many people have assumed for a long time that he is somehow connected, but he has done a pretty good job of covering the tracks."— Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.220.168.91 (talk • contribs)

As before, an op-ed that quotes "Madcow Morning News" and random twitter users is beyond silly, and in now way meets our threshold for WP:BLP. A random wikileaks conversation does not, either. This is not a tabloid. Kuru (talk) 12:52, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Carlos Slim. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:19, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Carlos Slim. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:52, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Carlos Slim. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:57, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mexican telecoms magnate[edit]

Modern magnates do business, investing and philantrophy. If I'm not mistaken, telecoms has been a focal industry for Mr Slim. Hence I'm proposing that we would change ❝Mexican business magnate, investor, and philanthropist❞ into “Mexican telecoms magnate”. Article descriptions need to be CONCISE. ToniTurunen (talk) 12:42, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Carlos_Slim&oldid=1212673949"