Talk:Ronn Torossian: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 17:10, 21 April 2015 editCada mori (talk \| contribs)238 edits →Relevance as a commentator: new section← Previous edit		Revision as of 00:07, 22 April 2015 edit undoHuon (talk \| contribs)Administrators51,324 edits →Relevance as a commentator: replyNext edit →
Line 360:		Line 360:
	http://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20140604/morris...		http://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20140604/morris...
	http://www.vibe.com/2011/11/5wpr-founder-chats-... ] (]) 17:10, 21 April 2015 (UTC)		http://www.vibe.com/2011/11/5wpr-founder-chats-... ] (]) 17:10, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

			:Which of those are third-party sources discussing Torossian's role as a commentator? ] (]) 00:04, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Revision as of 00:07, 22 April 2015

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ronn Torossian article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

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: 3 months

Biography C‑class

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.

This article was nominated for deletion on 2007 November 15. The result of the discussion was keep.

This article was nominated for deletion on 3 October 2008. The result of the discussion was keep.

The contents of the 5W Public Relations page were merged into Ronn Torossian on 24 April 2014. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page.

Individuals with a conflict of interest, particularly those representing the subject of the article, are strongly advised not to directly edit the article. See Misplaced Pages: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.

Editorials in The Forward

http://forward.com/articles/216599/echoes-of-mccarthyism-in-smear-campaign-against-ne
Forward Forum
Echoes of McCarthyism in Smear Campaign Against New Israel Fund Backers
Do Creators of Attack Ads Have No Sense of Decency?
By Deborah Lipstadt and David Ellenson
March 13, 2015.
... Unfortunately, McCarthy’s tactics are apparently still alive and well in the Jewish community today. Ronn Torossian and Pam Geller have attacked Karen Adler, Alisa Doctoroff, Edith Everett, and Carol Zabar — among the most prominent leaders of our community — as supporters of the BDS campaign against Israel who seek to undermine the Jewish state. Torossian did so in a New York Post opinion piece and Geller’s group has sponsored bus ads repeating the charge.
--Nbauman (talk) 06:15, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

This is yet another instance of Torossian's political commentaries making waves. In the archived discussion above, which became moderately rancourous at points, there was a decision - pretty much unilateral - by User:Huon to excise all reference to Torossian's political opinions and commentaries, despite the fact that these were discussed - and continue to be discussed - in practically all the references used in this article. Perhaps it is time to reopen that issue. --Ravpapa (talk) 09:28, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

That's an opinion piece, not the best source for a biography of a living person, to put it mildly (we wouldn't cite Torossian's opinion pieces in the articles on Doctoroff and the others he attacks, either). I looked for better sources and came up with this news report by Haaretz. Still not quite as good as I'd like sources to be (some Haaretz activities apparently are funded by NIF, the organization Torossian attacks), but quite a bit better than the rather polemical opinion pieces published by both sides. I'd like to see more on the connection between Geller and Torossian; the best I found was this opinion piece that said Torossian sent a press release on Geller's behalf but denied that his company works for Geller. That's rather vague. If there is a better source explaining that connection, we should probably expand on that. For now I'll add a short summary of what Haaretz reports. Huon (talk) 12:01, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Huon - Along the lines of opinion pieces not being relevant why are the opinions of torossian critics relevant along the lines of what you say. why is this relevant at all in a BLP

Atlantic Monthly writer Jeffrey Goldberg called him "the most disreputable flack in New York", particularly criticizing his representation of what Goldberg called the "lunatic fringe" of right-wing Israeli politics. Gawker’s Hamilton Nolan wrote that Torossian "embodies the public’s worst ideas about what a PR person is: loud, brash, more flash than substance, dirty, manipulative, amoral, and, in the end, not particularly bright."Richiehahahaa (talk) 00:47, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Closing discussions?

There are a few things I don't understand about this Talk page.

Where was the request at WP:ANRFC to close the discussion? I can't find it with several searches.
Someone seems to have closed the entire Talk page, not just the "Relevance of political commentary" section, including "Disclosures" and "The book". Was that the result of a decision or a coding mistake?
Where is the consensus to remove information in the lead about Torossian's political commentary? I can't find that either.

--Nbauman (talk) 21:32, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

I think that's an unfortunate mix of the archiving bot and the templates; see this version of the talk page for what was closed back in 2014. The current archive bottom template was added by Ravpapa here. The request for closure also has long since been archived; it's here. If no one objects, I'll manually archive the "political commentary" discussion along with the RfC itself and un-close the sections that weren't originally closed as part of that RfC. Huon (talk) 23:28, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

I just added the {{Archive bottom}} tag which was missing in the original archive. Now it works.

I still can't find a clear statement by the admin about what the consensus was.

It seems to be entirely about the question of whether certain statements belong in the lead. It doesn't have anything to do with what belongs in the body of the entry. Right? --Nbauman (talk) 12:42, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Since the RfC was entitled "RFC: mention of commentary in lead", yes, it was only about the question of whether activities of Torossian that had not elicited one shred of third-party coverage should be discussed in the lead. Now that we have a reliable third-party source discussing Torossian's activities as a political commentator, I've added what it said to the body of the article, but given the relative insignificance of that coverage compared with the coverage of his PR work, I'd still say adding it to the lead would give it undue weight. Huon (talk) 20:22, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

A discussion can be closed with a consensus or without a consensus. I don't see a clear statement that it was closed with a consensus. Is there a statement like that? Where is it? --Nbauman (talk) 22:56, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Still not archived, in the box at the top right of the closed discussion at the top of this talk page: " the prior discussion in the Relevance of political commentary section suggests that there was a consensus to remove information in lead about Torossian's political commentary per concerns about appropriate sourcing and the length of the lead at the time." That section originally immediately preceded the RfC and was closed along with it. Huon (talk) 00:08, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Birthdate

Can we use a primary source (like this) for his birthdate? It's not particularly controversial so I don't see a desperate need for super-rigorous sourcing. Mosmof (talk) 01:00, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

I would think a birthdate of a living person would be accepted from people who know him. I won't make a change here, but is someone being a little too overly protective here? His birthdate as it was written is real. Juda S. Engelmayer (talk) 22:52, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Published primary sources are acceptable for uncontroversial details. Word of mouth isn't. Huon (talk) 01:23, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

I just noticed that someone had the made the point of sourcing the birthdate (though that source didn't happen to verify the date so I removed it). I just wanted to make sure it wasn't controversial - you never know what is and isn't contentious in this article. But yeah, it's probably an overreaction. Mosmof (talk) 01:39, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Coverage of political commentary

Hi folks. I suspect a lot of you are tired of talking about this, but we really need to find some agreement here. I closed this previous RfC on the proposal to include statements about Torossian's political commentary in the lead. I determined that consensus supported not including these statement because appropriate reliable sources could not be identified and that adding such a statement was disproportionate given the length of the lead and what it covered at the time. Recently, Nbauman brought to my attention some concerns surrounding this close and coverage in the topic in the body based on the COI status of one participant and that the sources were not appropriately taken into consideration. Here are the sources that I've seen brought up or included in relation to Torossian's political commentary in one way or another:

If there are other articles, please reply below. Reading over these briefly, some appear to do a better job of covering his political opinions than others. The questions that need to be asked as I see it, are twofold:

What specific statements should be made about Torossian's political commentary and should be covered in the article body? Are these statements supported by reliable sources?
Does Torossian's political commentary represent a significant part of his biography, and merit a statement in the lead?

Based on prior discussions, I am not interested in seeing editors here waste time tossing accusations at each other of having COIs with poor evidence rather than getting to the actual issue. Opinions offered by editors with declared COIs and SPAs will be scrutinized. The question here is one of reliable sources, coverage, and weight. Let's frame the discussion around those guidelines. I, JethroBT 22:11, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Of those sources,

The Atlantic is an opinion piece whose only information on Torossian's political views comes in the form of a personal discussion Torossian had with the author while a guest at someone else's house who at that time "had gone to take a telephone call". I don't think that can be considered a reliable source for anything beyond the author's opinion. No information on Torossian's political commentary beyond that personal conversation.
The Forward is already mentioned in the article, but I don't thik it's significant enough to mention that episode in the lead.
Fox News and Bloomberg do not provide any information whatsoever on Torossian's political positions or commentary.
The New York Times says that Torossian "began attending political demonstrations while at Stuyvesant High School" and that he was "leading a group called the Coalition for Jewish Concerns" at age 20; no information on any more recent political views or commentary. In fact it says, Torossian no longer attends rallies ("I can't be holding a protest sign up to the cameras, and at the same time stand next to Puff Daddy as his spokesman").

There's nothing to do here. Huon (talk) 01:23, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

The thing to do is to replace the quote that you keep deleting, despite our objections. Torossian told Jeffrey Goldberg in The Atlantic, "I think we should kill a hundred Arabs or a thousand Arabs for every one Jew they kill." The interview was taped, so there's no question that Torossian said it. Torossian has never denied it in any verifiable source, and has never used the BLP process to complain about it. The Atlantic is a WP:RS, and Goldberg's column or blog, or whatever you want to call it, meets WP:RS: "Some news outlets host interactive columns they call blogs, and these may be acceptable as sources so long as the writers are professional journalists or are professionals in the field on which they write and the blog is subject to the news outlet's full editorial control." The quote was also reported in Gawker http://gawker.com/5069457/ronn-torossian-i-think-we-should-kill-a-hundred-arabs-or-a-thousand-arabs and Slate, http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2014/09/17/ted_cruz_will_not_join_a_protest_of_the_death_of_klinghoffer_after_all.html which are also WP:RSs, and Torossian never challenged them either. WP:WEIGHT is defined as coverage by multiple WP:RSs, so this quote meets that standard, and is significant enough to belong in the article. I would like you to either stop deleting it, or explain here for the record why you think you have a right to delete it. I'd also like User:I JethroBT to tell me whether this is persuasive enough to convince him that it belongs in the article. --Nbauman (talk) 16:34, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing these to attention. The quote is clearly discussed outside the Atlantic piece itself. Rather than opine on these sources immediately, I would rather wait to hear what other editors have to say. I, JethroBT 19:46, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

That's a very interesting comment. "The interview was taped, so there's no question that Torossian said it." How do you know that? I just double-checked, and The Atlantic, Gawker and Slate do not say so. In fact, none of them calls the conversation an interview. Gawker and Slate only quote the The Atlantic article and don't show any evidence of having independently verified it. So unless you confirmed that detail with either Goldberg, The Atlantic or Torossian, how can you know whether the conversation was taped? Are there reliable published sources confirming this detail? To me, "At one point, when Elon had gone to take a telephone call, Torossian and I started talking I was arguing in favor of some sort of proportionality but Torossian interrupted" does not sound like a formal interview at all. Huon (talk) 21:06, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

I have argued this point at length with User:Huon, in previous discussions. I repeat: just about every source used in this article mentions Torossian's political views. Some of the sources deal almost exclusively with his politics, but even those that concentrate on his PR work (like the NYT profile) mention it prominently. His published commentaries in notable publications frequently draw reactions in other notable publications. Huon's argument that Torossian's political views and activities are not a significant part of his biography is so specious that it defies rebuttal.

We know that Torossian himself has militated to remove all mention of his politics from this article. He has done so both through the minions of his many sockpuppets and through direct contact with Huon and others at the help desk. The reason for this is clear: as User:Judae1 has written, "Torossian is a PR guy" - his often inflammatory political opinions are likely to scare off potential clients.

Huon's aggressive and uncollegial editing of this article (something uncharacteristic of him in other articles), the fact that his edits consistently matched the wishes of Torossian himself, and the fact that he, by his own admission, had direct contact with Torossian on more than one occasion, suggested to me and other editors of this page at one time that Torossian had somehow "gotten to him". Subsequent edits by Huon, which were not consistent with Torossian's interests, later suggested to me that this was not true, and that Huon was simply blinded or misguided. If, at that time, I posted comments that suggested a lack of integrity on Huon's part, I apologize for that now.

This apology, however, in no way mitigates the fact that the excision of Torossian's political commentaries and views from this article constitutes a gross distortion of his persona. For a more detailed explication of this, I refer editors to Archives 2 and 3 of this talk page, and specifically to this and this discussion]. --Ravpapa (talk) 06:31, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

P.S. Huon is right and NBaum is wrong regarding the thousand Arab quote. It was not made in an on-the-record interview, and there is nothing I have seen that suggests that it was recorded. That does not call into question its veracity - it has been repeated in other reliable sources, and has not been rebutted by Torossian - on the contrary, Torossian has published views consistent with this comment in his political commentaries. --Ravpapa (talk) 06:31, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

You're right. I can't find anything to say that it was recorded. But it was reported in at least 3 WP:RSs -- The Atlantic, Gawker and Slate -- and in many more, depending on how you define WP:RS. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nbauman (talk • contribs) 10:09, 9 April 2015‎

@Ravpapa: But what specific statements are you suggesting we add to the article about his political commentary? Are you suggesting we add all of the details you proposed here? I, JethroBT 00:19, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

So to get to the point, I'd like to ask Huon: Since this quote has appeared in The Atlantic, Gawker, and Slate, among others, I believe it meets I, JethroBT's criteria of reliable sources, coverage, and weight. Do you agree? If not, why not? --Nbauman (talk) 23:31, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

@I JethroBT:: In response to your question, you might look at this version of the article, as edited by ]. It might, indeed, place too much emphasis on his political activities, but it is the general idea.

In any case, whatever details we include, we must put them in some kind of context. The section on the New Israel Fund campaign, as it now appears, is completely meaningless: do you (a fairly informed reader) have any idea what the New Israel Fund is, what kind of things it supports, and who in the Israeli political spectrum supports or opposes it? Without explaining those things, the section might just as well be left out. --Ravpapa (talk) 05:40, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Torossian's campaign against the New Israel Fund has gotten enormous coverage, so it belongs in the entry. However, the entry must also follow WP:NPOV, so the article should also include the response of the New Israel Fund and of third parties defending them. The responses have been reported by at least 2 WP:RS, Haaretz and The Forward.

To say that "he criticized the New Israel Fund" is a vague understatement that omits substantive facts to an extent that amounts to distortion. According to Haaretz, his client, Geller, identified New Israel Fund donors by name and called them "worse" than "kapos" (i.e., Nazis). Torossian personally called the New Israel Fund a "demonstrably anti-Israel group." T’ruah said that the attacks on New Israel Fund donors were "spreading lies, intimidating donors, and publicly defaming upstanding Jewish communal leaders." Torossian threatened legal action if she did not retract and apologize for that statement. To delete statements like that and replace it with a bland statement that "he criticized the New Israel Fund" would be WP:CENSOR. --09:56, 10 April 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nbauman (talk • contribs)

NEW ISRAEL FUND & MEDIA. NEW YORK TIMES - AND MANY OTHERS SAYS I MET PRIVATELY WITH DEBLASIO & POLICE. WAS THAT NOT A MUCH MUCH BIGGER STORY THAN NEW ISRAEL FUND. SO DESCRIBE DEBLASIO AND POLICE ON MY BIOGRAPHY PAGE.

GELLER IS NOT MY CLIENT. INACCURATE AS I HAVE SAID REPEATEDLY. NEW ISRAEL FUND: LIKUD SAYS THEY ARE ANTI ISRAEL. NAFTALI BENNETT THE ECONOMIC MINISTER OF ISRAEL SAYS THEY ARE ANTI ISRAEL. GELLER IS NOT MY CLIENT STOP THIS LIE.

YET, IN THIS WEEK NY POST I AM QUOTED EXTENSIVELY ON TAXIS. WHY DONT YOU POST MY VIEWPOINTS ON TAXIS WHICH ARE IN MEDIA EVERY WEEK? OR FOR EXAMPLE MY OPINION ON THE POLICE UNION I REPRESENT WHICH ARE IN MEDIA EVERY WEEK. RonnToro (talk) 10:03, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

QUOTE ME ON TAXI INDUSTRY THEN SINCE YOU WANT MY VIEWPOINTS.

DO NOT REPRESENT GELLER. NOT A CLIENT. http://jewschool.com/2015/03/35411/5wpr-pamela-geller-join-forces-to-attack-new-israel-fund/

I EMPLOY 125 PEOPLE. LESS THAN 2 OF THEM KNOW WHAT THE NEW ISRAEL FUND IS. NO THAT SHOULD NOT BE PART OF MY BIOGRAPHY YOU PEOPLE HAVE POLITICAL MOTIVATIONS. IN MY INDUSTRY I RUN A TOP 20 PR FIRM AND WIN AWARDS. THAT IS WHAT I AM KNOWN FOR AND HUNDREDS OF CLIENTS. IF YOU WANT TO WRITE ABOUT NEW ISRAEL FUND THEN WRITE ABOUT ALL THE CLIENTS I AM QUOTED FOR. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RonnToro (talk • contribs) 10:09, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

I can't speak to everything that RonnToro has posted recently. (I lack the time to parse through all of it.) Here is what I can say:

The quotation published in The Atlantic () is inappropriate for inclusion in the article, because the source is not reliable. It's written in the context of an op-ed / newsblog piece very clearly slanted against Torossian. The quotation was gathered anecdotally outside of a formal interview and is not public. That it was repeated in two other places does not verify the quotation. Furthermore, if the person below is indeed the subject of the article, we now have a clear objection to the claim. Finally, if the quotation were truly an important detail in his biography, I expect something as outrageous as this quote would be picked up on more than a few newsblogs. The context of the quote is problematic, and the coverage just isn't there.
Regarding the general political commentary, I don't see any progress moving forward on this issue until someone produces specific language for it and how it is sourced. Ravpapa mentioned that some elements of this version of the article might be considered. What elements could be reintroduced and how would they be sourced? From this discussion, I see different politically-related things discussed about Torossian, but they are about different topics. I do not see a more holistic discussion of Torossian's political opinions.

Unfortunately, I will need to exit from this discussion as a participant due to my own time limitations, so I'll leave it to the rest of you to resolve these matters. I, JethroBT 22:47, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Discussion at conflict of interest notice board

Please see here. ThanksJytdog (talk) 13:18, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

note - I added a box to the bottom of the yellowish box at the top of this page, to make it easy for conflicted editors to comply with WP:COI and suggest edits to the article here as opposed to making them directly to the article. Jytdog (talk) 14:24, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Upton Sinclair said, “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”

When I'm trying to get an editor to understand something, I'd like to know whether his salary depends on his not understanding it.

And I'd like to know whether User:Huon has any financial or other relationship with Ronn Torossian. I and others here would like a statement from him one way or the other. Is that a reasonable request? Can we get that? --Nbauman (talk) 15:51, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

User:Huon has provided such a disclosure. You can read it here. Regards, --Ravpapa (talk) 16:40, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

OK, no financial connection. Thanks. If Torossian has any complaints about the article, he should come to this Talk page directly. One problem with #wikipedia-en-help is that there is no record of the discussion, so unless someone happens to be on the chat at the same time, there's no way to find out what he had to say. --Nbauman (talk) 18:42, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

THIS IS RONN TOROSSIAN. I OWN A BUSINESS AND AM NOT GOING TO DEBATE HERE. THAT SAID, I NEVER EVER SAID WHAT JEFF GOLDBERG CLAIMS I SAID IN THAT ARTICLE. IT IS A LIE AND WAS NEVER SAID. IT ABSOLUTELY WAS NOT RECORDED AS I NEVER EVER SAID IT AND I DEMAND THE IMMEDIATE REMOVAL OF THAT LIE. ONE OF YOU CAN EMAIL ME TO RONN@5wpr.com IF YOU DOUBT THIS IS ME. I WILL NOT DEBATE HERE I WILL SAY THAT I NEVER EVER SAID WHAT GOLDBERG SAYS I SAID - AND YES GOLDBERG HAS BEEN ADVISED REPEATEDLY I SAY IT IS A LIE. RonnToro (talk) 10:01, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

IF YOU HAVE WHAT GAKWER - A SALICIOUS GOSSIP BLOG SAYS ABOUT ME 7 YEARS AGO- THEN WHY DO YOU NOT HAVE MANY MANY POSITIVE QUOTES ABOUT ME. THAT IS NOT A BIOGRAPHY! THIS READS LIKE A GOSSIP SHEET NOT A BIOGRAPHY ! FIND ME 1 FEATURE STORY ABOUT ME IN LAST 5 YEARS WHICH MENTIONS THIS ISRAEL STUFF YOU MENTION. FIND ME 1 FEATURE STORY WRITTEN BY SOMEONE ELSE IN LAST 5 YEARS (I AM 40 YEARS OLD) WHICH MENTIONS ISRAEL. YOU WILL NOT. I REPRESENT MANY CLIENTS AND MANY INTERESTS AND AM IN MEDIA AND TV VERY REGULARLY FOR MANY ISSUES. GO DEBATE POLITICS ON A WEBSITE MY BIOGRAPHY IS NOT THAT. I HAVE A FAMILY AND BUSINESS AND WILL NOT DEBATE HERE.

YES JUDA ENGELMAYER WORKS FOR 5WPR AND WILL COMMENT AND HAS AND DOES IDENTIFY HIMSELF. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RonnToro (talk • contribs) 10:14, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

AS JUDA SAID BEFORE: " It doesn't belong in the opener as that is not what he is known for. He doesn't have followers, neither US nor Israeli law makers seek his guidance for their policy issues, and no one on Misplaced Pages that I can see has used any of his opinions on Israel, Middle East or President Obama as references in any Misplaced Pages articles. What does that say about what he is known for? He is on shows like Entertainment Tonight and E!, Fox 5 News, CBS and the like for comments on the careers of Jay-Z, A-Rod and Justin Bieber, or brands like Campbell's Soup or Virgin Airlines, but media does not seek him for comment on foreign policy. Any honest search of media will show you that. All I ask here is to be fair and objective. He is known for PR and marketing. Juda S. Engelmayer (talk) 11:47, 23 July 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by RonnToro (talk • contribs)

Awards

Per the "If no third-party source mentions it, it cannot be all that significant" standard, I have removed the Stevie Awards. Going by their self-representation, with about 30% to 40% of nominees winning something, their financing via nomination fees, and their FAQ promoting the PR advantages of nominating yourself for, and winning, a Stevie, I rather don't think that's a significant achievement. Huon (talk) 22:19, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

ARTICLE

I WILL NOT DEBATE THISBUT DURING MY MORNING RUN THIS IRKED ME. YOU ARE COMMENTING ON MY LIFE AND IT IS NOT TRUE. ANYONE CAN SAY I SAID ANYTHING IN AN OPINION PIECE. I DID NOT TELL JEFF GOLDBERG THAT COMMENT 8 YEARS AGO IT IS A LIE. A GOSSIP PUBLICATION SAID SOMETHING ABOUT ME 7 YEARS AGO OR SO AND IT DEFINES ME BECAUSE A FEW OF YOU DECIDED THAT IS THE CASE.

THEN WHY DO YOU NOT TAKE ALL OF THE QUOTES FROM MY WEBSITE WHERE PEOPLE SAY I AM GREAT. TAKE THE HUNDREDS OF GREAT ARTICLES I HAVE BEEN QUOTED IN CALLING ME PR GURU GENIUS ETC THERE ARE MANY MANY PRAISES OF ME INCLUDING AWARDS.

WHY IS SOMEONES OPINION ABOUT ME (GOOD OR BAD) RELEVANT IN MY BIOGRAPHY. THAT DOES NOT MAKE SENSE.

ALSO I AM 40 YEARS OLD. THESE STORIES ARE MANY MANY YEARS OLD.

NOW LET US GO THROUGH THE BIOGRAPHY.

1ST PARAGRAPH: " As a public relations executive, Torossian is known for his aggressive tactics, which have won him both opponents and supporters." OPPONENTS AND SUPPORTERS? AM I A CANDIDATE FOR OFFICE? I OWN A BUSINESS. I AM KNOWN FOR BUILDING ONE OF THE LARGEST PRIVATELY HELD PR AGENCIES IN AMERICA. I AM NOW 40 YEARS OLD. THESE SUPPOSED CONTROVERSIES WERE ALL 7 YEARS AGO OR MORE. WHY DOES OPPONENTS AND SUPPORTERS DEFINE ME - AND WHAT DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH HOW I EARN A LIVING.

SECOND PARAGRAPH: I WORKED FOR THE LIKUD IN JERUSALEM IN 1998 REFLECT THAT ACCURATELY - LIKUD IS THE RULING PARTY IN ISRAEL. http://www.prweek.com/article/1258861/defiant-torossian-takes-pride-pushing-buttons http://news.investors.com/technology/031201-345097-international-relations-israeli-and-us-tech-industries-uneasy-as-sharon-era-begins.htm

NEXT PARAGRAPH: VERY LITTLE OF MY WORK IS MY POLITICS.

Reception PARAGRAPH: ATALNTIC MONTHLY I NEVER SAID WHAT HE SAYS I SAID - WHY IS HIS OPINION RELEVANT. GAWKER WHY WOULD THIS DEFINE MY CAREER

ALL OF THESE SOURCES ARE 6-8 YEARS OLD. I AM 40 YEARS OLD. OWN A $20MM ++ BUSINESS. I DONT HAVE OPPONENTS AND SUPPORTERS. I AM A SMALL BUSINESS OWNER ENTREPRENEUR.

THERE ARE MANY ARTICLES WHICH ARE POSITIVE ABOUT ME IF YOU WANT SAY THOSE.

AND IF YOU WANT RECEPTION THEN INCLUDE HOW WE WORK FOR LARGEST CAB OWNER IN AMERICA - FOR POLICE UNIONS - FOR FORTUNE 100 COMPANIES - VERY UNAWARE WHY RECEPTION WOULD INCLUDE COMMENTS FROM 8 YEARS AGO WHICH DO NOT DEFINE WHO I AM AS A PERSON. INCLUDE THE THOUSANDS OF CLIENTS WE REPRESENT

Political commentary SECTION: I AM ON TV AT LEAST ONCE A WEEK USUALLY MORE ON BREAKING NEWS - NEVER EVER POLITICAL. I AM ALSO QUOTED MORE THAN THAT FOR COMMENTARY ON PR CRISIS OR MARKETING CRISIS INCLUDE THAT.

WHY IS A CRITICISM OF NEW ISRAEL IN MY BIOGRAPHY. I WROTE A BREAKING NEWS STORY ON MR BRAINWASH A VERY FAMOUS STREET ARTIST SOME MONTHS AGO INCLUDE THAT. I WRITE OFTEN ON THE SOUTH OF FRANCE AND ITS BEAUTY AND ON SPORTS INCLUDE THAT. THERE ARE ISRAEL OBSESSORS CLEARLY COMMENTING HERE. IF YOU WANT MY OPINIONS INCLUDE THE MANY MANY OF THEM THAT ARE ABOUT NEW YORK CITY

http://observer.com/2014/08/40-years-of-new-york-city-memories/ AND I NEVER WROTE " in conjunction with a campaign by Pamela Geller over the NIF's stance on the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign.

I WROTE AN ARTICLE WITH NETANYAHU FORMER CHIEF OF STAFF AND A FORMER BILL CLINTON SPOKESPERSON - THAT IS ACCURATE IF YOU WANT TO USE SOMETHING ALTHOUGH I DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHY THAT WOULD DEFINE ME. BUT IF YOU WANT TO GET IT ACCURATE http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/foreign-policy/235832-new-israel-fund-is-no-friend-of-israel NEVER WROTE WITH PAM GELLER. DID WRITE WITH BIRNBAUM AND SHEINKOPF.

IF YOU WANT TO KEEP MAKING UP STORIES ABOUT MY LIFE THEN I CANNOT STOP YOU IN TODAYS WORLD.

BUT WHAT YOU DEFINE ME AS IS UNACCURATE AND ABSOLUTELY UNTRUE. AND MANY YEARS AGO THEN WAS NOT TRUE.

I OWN A PR FIRM. THAT IS WHY YOU SHOULD WRITE ABT ME ON WIKIPEDIA.

IF YOU DOUBT I AM WHO I SAY I AM DESIGNATE ONE PERSON (1) TO EMAIL ME - OR FEEL FREE TO CALL 5WPR.

WIKIPEDIA PAGES SHOULD BE ACCURATE. WHAT YOU PEOPLE HAVE HERE IS A DISTORTION - AND INACCURATE. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RonnToro (talk • contribs) 12:07, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

AND THIS IS RONN TOROSSIAN. WILL ASK JUDA ENGELMAYER WHO WORKS FOR 5WPR TO CHANGE THE PICTURE WHICH IS ALSO 8 YEARS OLD. WIKIPEDIA BIOGRAPHY ON LIVING PEOPLE IS AN ENCYCLOPEDIA AS I UNDERSTAND IT. THAT IS NOT A GOSSIP PUBLICATION OR A PLACE FOR PEOPLE WHO HAVE POLITICAL OPINIONS TO OPINE ON MY LIFE OR VIEWPOINTS.

I WORK IN PR AND AM A BUSINESS OWNER. I AM INTERESTED IN AND WRITE ABOUT ISRAEL. I ALSO WRITE ABOUT NEW YORK TRAVEL TECHNOLOGY ART AND OTHER PERSONAL INTERESTS. IF THAT IS INTERESTING INCLUDE ALL.

I WORKED FOR LIKUD in 1998 AT THE AGE OF 24. I AM TODAY 40 YEARS OLD AND A BUSINESS OWNER. NOT A POLITICIAN WITH OPPONENTS AND SUPPORTERS. DONT KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS - EVEN IF THE PEOPLE WHO "COMMENT" ON MY LIFE ARE INVOLVED WITH ISRAEL THAT IS NOT MY LIFE OR I IMAGINE WHY I HAVE A WIKIPEDIA PAGE. RonnToro (talk) 12:13, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Welcome back to Misplaced Pages, Ronn. Good to see you writing under your own name.

@Diannaa:: Although these recent posts bear many of the earmarks of the community-banned User:Babasalichai, I hope you will not delete them. In this case, Torossian is identifying himself, and, in his uniquely enthusiastic and prolix way, makes a number of points which we should take into account. To wit,

Torossian denies that he ever made the "1000 Arabs" comment quoted by Jeffrey Goldberg. The quote is not currently in the article, and I have not seen a denial published in a third party source (is there one? If so, Ronn, please point us to it). Nonetheless, I think his denial on this talk page is strength enough not to include the quote.

Torossian contends that most of the sources used in this article (he specifically refers to those sources criticizing him, but it is true also of the sources praising him) are old, and, from his point of view, out of date. He has a point. I think it behooves us to cite some more recent profiles of him. I will do a bit of research, and I suggest that others do, too.

Torossian denies that he represents Pamela Geller or her organization, AFDI. Although the article as currently written does not specifically say that, it is vague about the connection between them in a way that I believe is unfair. Press reports claim that Torossian personally distributed AFDI's press release condemning the New Israel Fund. Ronn, do you deny that that is true? Please, make the denial specific: something like, "I never distributed press releases issued by the AFDI." If, in fact, Torossian does deny that, we should probably remove discussion of any connection between the two. Nonetheless, we should still probably include a quote or two from Torossian's published columns against the fund, especially since the fund has specifically named Torossian as a leader among its attackers. We also need to provide some context, so readers have some idea what all the flack is about (I said that already).

YOU WANT TO GET IT ACCURATE http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/foreign-policy/235832-new-israel-fund-is-no-friend-of-israel NEVER WROTE WITH PAM GELLER. DID WRITE WITH BIRNBAUM AND SHEINKOPF.

Torossian repeats his contention that his political commentaries are irrelevant to his biography in Misplaced Pages. I fail to understand this: if he doesn't want his commentaries to be quoted, why does he write them in the first place? I still stand by my original position: just about every source used in this article devotes extensive coverage to his political opinions. We should quote those opinions directly, and refer to the controversies they have engendered. This is an essential part of his biography. I would like to hear (yet again) what other editors think of this.

Finally, Torossian suggests in his comments that he has changed in the last 15 years - now he focuses on his PR business, and his political activism is a thing of the past. Again, I can't understand how he can claim that and continue to write op-eds and opinion columns on political issues, consistently supporting specific and highly controversial political positions. Nonetheless, I think we need to consider this contention carefully, and perhaps revise the article accordingly. --Ravpapa (talk) 14:22, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

I DID NOT SAY WHAT GOLDBERG SAYS. AND WHAT HE THINKS IS NOT RELEVANT FOR MY BIOGRAPHY. NOR IS GAWKER. THEY BOTH SHOULD NOT BE THERE. WHY IS THERE ANYONE OPINION. I DO NOT REPRESENT AFDI OR GELLER. PERIOD. ABSURD THAT SHOULD BE EVEN DISCUSSED IN A BIOGRAPHY. IF YOU INCLUDE NEW ISRAEL FUND INCLUDE THAT I WORKED WITH HANK SHEINKOPF AND NETANYAHU CHIEF OF STAFF. AND INCLUDE THE POLICE UNION THE CABBIES AND HUNDREDS OF CLIENTS WE HAVE WHICH ARE MUCH LARGER NEWS THAN NEW ISRAEL.

YOU PEOPLE ARE ISRAEL FOCUSED. NOT WHAT I DO. I WRITE MANY ARTICLES ON MANY TOPICS. INCLUDE ART AND SPORTS AND NEW YORK. AND MY BUSINESS IS WHAT MAKES ME NOTEABLE. I OWN A $20 MILLION AGENCY THAT IS WHAT I AM NOTEABLE FOR. I AM 40 YEARS OLD THOSE ARTICLES ARE 8 YEARS OLD. IF YOU WANT TO START QUOTING MY POLITICAL OPINION THEN QUOTE MY OPINION ON ART AND FRANCE AND SPORTS WHICH ARE BIGGER NEWS. I AM ON AIR CONTRIBUTOR TO ENTERTAINMENT TONITE FOR 3 YEARS INCLUDE MY HUNDREDS OF SEGMENTS THERE.

REMOVE THE LIES WHICH NOW EXIST AND ARE CRAZY. I DO NOT HAVE SUPPORTERS AND OPPONENTS NOT RUNNING FOR OFFICE. I DO HAVE 125 EMPLOYEES- LANDLORDS AND MANY OTHERS WHO NEED RENT PAID RonnToro (talk) 15:40, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

http://everything-pr.com/ronn-torossian-pr/246763/ http://observer.com/2014/11/six-questions-for-ronn-torossian-nadine-johnson-peggy-siegal-michael-tavani/ http://www.vibe.com/2011/11/5wpr-founder-chats-new-book-why-everyone-needs-good-pr-digital-age/ RONN TOROSSIAN ON TIM TEBOW http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2012/03/22/big-reaction-to-tebow-trade-in-the-big-apple/

http://thejewishreporter.com/2012/03/22/tim-tebows-trade-a-blessing-for-jews/

http://charismanews.com/opinion/33051-tim-tebow-the-media-is-not-your-friend

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2012/03/22/big-reaction-to-tebow-trade-in-the-big-apple/

http://www.algemeiner.com/2012/03/23/the-mitzvah-of-tebows-new-york-arrival/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltUESzLJ1Z4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPy3ib7SX-s

http://charismanews.com/opinion/33051-tim-tebow-the-media-is-not-your-friend

http://gothamist.com/2012/03/22/will_tim_tebow_be_the_evangelical_k.php

http://blogs.trb.com/sports/custom/business/blog/2012/03/timsanity_new_york_supreme_tes.html http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/football/jets/ny-jets-quarterback-tim-tebow-a-big-hit-madison-ave-experts-article-1.1048658#ixzz1przgIjEN

http://www.charismanews.com/us/33038-broncos-trade-puts-tim-tebow-in-spotlight-with-jeremy-lin

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1115076-pr-expert-saystim-tebow-will-be-a-marketing-hit-in-new-york-city

INCLUDE ME ON BILL COSBY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEmTC9Mxhjc BATMAN: http://www.globalnews.ca/pages/story.aspx?id=6442683059 http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2012/07/20/colorado-theater-massacre-could-hurt-dark-knight-rises-at-box-office-experts/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lliRQfKznE&feature=plcp Ronn Torossian on CBS The Insider on Olympics Marketing http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JksiMYHVrMg&feature=youtu.be Ronn Torossian, CEO 5W Public Relations on CBS Insider on non traditional actors and models https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjMlFLh2QUM Ronn on The Insider about Kristen Stewart

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JaRo8WrjcH0 Ronn on The Insider

YOU SHOULD INCLUDE MY OPINIONS ON TIM TEBOW WHICH WAS MUCH MUCH BIGGER NEWS THAN ME ON NEW ISRAEL FUND. BUT YOU PEOPLE TALK ONLY ABOUT ISRAEL AND LIVE IN A BUBBLE. GO EDIT SOME OTHER PUBLIC RELATIONS EXECUTIVE PAGE. ALL YOU PEOPLE WHO DISAGREE WITH ME ON ISRAEL POLITICS SHOULD NOT COMMENT ON MY LIFE. THAT IS NOT MY LIFE.

RonnToro (talk) 15:45, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

OPEDS ON TECHNOLOGY - INCLUDE THOSE - http://insights.wired.com/profile/RonnTorossian

EVERY NEWSPAPER IN WORLD COVERED THIS STORY AND HAD 5W IN IT: http://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/dec/16/high-school-senior-who-claimed-fake-72m-fortune-releases-video-apology

HUGE NEWS STORY - WAY BIGGER THAN NEW ISRAEL HUNDREDS OF PAPERS: http://www.newsweek.com/free-cab-rides-emergency-responders-during-blizzard-nyc-302028

ME ON IHOP IN NEW YORK - http://therealdeal.com/blog/2011/10/11/ihop-to-take-space-in-chelsea-s-limelight-ashkenazy-acquisition-controls-both-pancake-franchisee-and-building/ MONOPOLY IN NEW YORK: http://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20110214/manhattan/sightseeing-bus-company-declared-monopoly

THIS IS NOT WORTHY OF MY BIOGRAPHY BUT IF YOU PEOPLE INSIST ON INCLUDING ISRAEL THEN THIS PERHAPS http://observer.com/2015/01/battling-jewish-titans-alan-dershowitz-and-ronn-torossian-kiss-and-make-up/

ALL OF YOU PEOPLE FOCUS ON ISRAEL AND IGNORE THE WORLD WHICH EXISTS WHICH IS WHAT I DO FOR A LIVING AS OWNER OF ONE OF LARGEST PRIVATE AMERICAN PUBLIC RELATINS COMPANIES. STOP. RonnToro (talk) 15:54, 10 April 2015 (UTC) IF YOU MUST INCLUDE ISRAEL - http://jpupdates.com/2014/09/22/eric-cantor-faces-a-subpoena-from-israel-law-center-in-israel-china-terror-case/ - BUT WHY WOULD GOLDBERG COMMENT ABOUT ME BE AT ALL RELEVANT. AND WHY IS GAWKER OPINION ON ME IMPORTANT IN A BIOGRAPHY.

THIS WAS A MUCH BIGGER STORY OF ME WORKING FOR LANDLORDS IN EVERY NEW YORK PAPER. IF YOU WANT TO DESCRIBE NEW ISRAEL DESCRIBE THIS LANDLORD. http://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20140604/morris-heights/building-where-boy-fell-death-was-on-citys-elevator-offender-list IF I SAY SOMEONE IS AN IDIOT DOES THAT DEFINE THEIR LIFE. ALL YOU ISRAEL PEOPLE SHOULD REALIZE THERE IS A WORLD OUT THERE.

I REPEAT THAT THE WHOLE BIOGRAPHY IS INACCURATE AND WRONG. GOLDBERG AND OTHER QUOTES DO NOT BELONG IN BIOGRAPHY OF SOMEONE

RonnToro (talk) 15:59, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

http://61.129.118.78/Opinion/book-review/Business-Books-TOP-FIVE-US-Jun-15-2012/shdaily.shtml - top business book according to Shanghai Daily

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/20/nyregion/thecity/20feat.html?_r=0 Mr. Torossian is one of the New Yorkiest practitioners of this quintessentially New York profession

http://www.davidovit.com/articles/Torossian.pdf - long feature in Lifestyles magazine http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/new_york/confident_comeback - TOROSSIAN REPRESENTED OLMERT AND SHARON. THAT IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN WHAT JEFFREY GOLDBERG SAYS. SO REMOVE GOLDBERG AND ADD THIS IF YOU CARE ABOUT ACCURACY. ANYONE CAN WRITE ANYTHING IN TODAY DAY AND AGE DOES NOT MAKE IT TRUE.

RonnToro (talk) 16:03, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

I have blocked the above account for block evasion (banned User:Babasalichai) and suggested that he contact us by email for removal of any inaccurate material. I will not remove the above posts, for the convenience of interested editors who might like to investigate these links for possible improvement of the article. -- Diannaa (talk) 16:48, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Just for the record: While I agree that the RonnToro account is probably another avatar of Babasalichai, I would consider an exception in this case. Unlike previous instances of the many-headed monster, this account speaks in the true voice of its owner. And the link you provide specifically advises subjects of articles to post their concerns to the article talk page - something Torossian has done, if somewhat flamboyantly and verbosely. Specifically, I asked if he wanted to deny that he had distributed AFDI press releases as reported in a number of newspapers. I think he should be allowed to make such a denial here, if he wishes (his last post is not a denial of this).

You are certainly within your prerogative to block him, as he is community banned. In any case, if you choose some measure of clemency in this case, he should certainly be advised to keep his comments short, focused and to the point. Respectfully, --Ravpapa (talk) 17:06, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

The user still has his talk page available to respond to that question if he so wishes. -- Diannaa (talk) 17:14, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Okay. Fair enough. --Ravpapa (talk) 17:24, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

What does it take to get something heard here? Ronn Torossian has for the first time, I believe, commented himself. It is him doing it and I can attest to that. The new picture of which I have absolute right to use and distribute was removed and now there is doubt as to whether it is Ronn himself speaking. You guys are incorrigible sometimes. Is this just to beat this subject down so much that editors can continue to solely determine right and wrong? As to a point made earlier, if there is doubt as to the veracity of the comments allegedly made to the writer of The Atlantic, they how on earth is that same comment that was attributed to that same article, repurposed in a thing such as Gawker considered to be a viable source? Repeat a lie long enough and it becomes the truth? Come on people, you are all smarter than that. Ronn himself is finally appealing directly and you argue it may not be him. You use doublespeak when considering what commentary on him are legitimate or not and his picture is deleted for copyright violation, which was done by a BOT apparently, but still at issue. What do you want? Juda S. Engelmayer (talk) 19:42, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

The account User:RonnToro has been blocked because it is likely being operated by the same person as User:Babasalichai, who was banned from editing Misplaced Pages as a result of this discussion: Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive222#Community ban proposal for Babasalichai. At this point, if he wishes to have incorrect material removed from this article, I think his best option is to send an email to info-en-qwikimedia.org, where there are volunteers experienced in handling matters of this kind. Also, I think I am out of my depth here and have decided not to monitor or help with this article any more. -- Diannaa (talk) 23:17, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

I, too, think it is time for me to take a bow and move on to better things. While I have serious misgivings about how the article is edited now, I guess it could also be a lot worse. Anyway, @Huon: and @Nbauman:, it's your ball game now. I'm taking Ronn off my watchlist. (though, @Judae1:, if you come up with a free use picture, I will gladly add it in.) --Ravpapa (talk) 05:54, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Relevance as a commentator

Came across this page and am very curious as to the merit of pigeon holing this person as a commentator on one specific area – when there’s clearly a wide spectrum of topics that he’s covered.

The below are the furthest things from ‘Pro-Israel’, and I think it should be reflected in the known for section on page. Possible changing the language to either “Author” or “Pop Culture Commentator”.

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2012/03/22/big-reacti... http://thejewishreporter.com/2012/03/22/tim-teb... http://www.charismanews.com/opinion/33051-tim-t... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltUESzLJ1Z4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPy3ib7SX-s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEmTC9Mxhjc http://globalnews.ca/news/268464/q-a-the-impact... http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2012/07/20... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JksiMYHVrMg http://insights.wired.com/profile/RonnTorossian... http://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/dec/16/hi... http://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20140604/morris... http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/20/nyregion/thec... http://www.davidovit.com/articles/Torossian.pdf http://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20140604/morris... http://www.vibe.com/2011/11/5wpr-founder-chats-... Cada mori (talk) 17:10, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Which of those are third-party sources discussing Torossian's role as a commentator? Huon (talk) 00:04, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Categories: