# Talk:Penny Pritzker

}}

Stop coatracking. It's original research, also, as no source draws the whole tenuous connection. Wikipedia is not a blog. Phlegm Rooster (talk) 03:12, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Umm, it's not.  It provides useful context as to how Pritzker was associated with Obama before she got to run his piggy bank. Yellow Rain (talk) 03:19, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Do you have a reliable source that says where and when PP met BO? Phlegm Rooster (talk) 03:23, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Did I say "met"?  BTW, Ayers is hardly just "some guy."  Her taking the reigns of his organization is quite significant. Yellow Rain (talk) 03:29, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Also, there's a huge amount of completely unsourced info in that page (generally not from me) about her supposed philanthropic activities, etc.  I find it strange that you are on such a jihad to suppress the CAC reference, which is not at all tenuous. Yellow Rain (talk) 03:36, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
I find it strange that you use the word jihad instead of crusade. On Wikipedia, we editors do not decide that somebody taking the reigns of somebody's organization is quite significant, we find a source that says it is significant. You have strung together a series of sources, none of which mention the connection between any of the factoids. Phlegm Rooster (talk) 04:03, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Umm, what are you getting at with this jihad v. crusade angle?  Be specific.  And there's no need to have a specific source for the connection; it is self-evident.  And I did not say that this connections is significant; it merely is.  You seem to mean this connection shouldn't be implied, or made visible, at all, lest the weak and culpable readers of WP be led into thinking... what, precisely?  Again, please be specific. Yellow Rain (talk) 03:22, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Pritzker was the subject of a long article today in the Wall Street Journal about her association with a major bank failure in 2001. Surprisingly, her article had nothing about it, so I added a new section.
As I looked over her article's history, I noticed a recurring problem with POV-issues. I'm going out of Internet range for a week -- can someone keep an eye on this? The story of Pritzker's involvement in the bank is complex and nuanced; I'd hate to see that get lost by POV-editing from either direction. Our readers just need the facts so they can draw their own conclusions; I've tried to write it that way.
Google's archives are full of neutral, credible news stories going back to before the bank's failure that could be used to create a Superior Bank (Illinois) article that would tell the story in much greater detail. --A. B. (talk •  contribs)  17:00, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Correction: we already have a Superior Bank of Chicago article; it could use expansion. --A. B. (talk •  contribs)  17:06, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Some time last night, the photo of Ms. Pritzker mysteriously vanished from the article.  Where did it go? Why? I can't find it in the history of the article. Was there a problem with the copyright permission?  Surely there's a good explantion for its sudden disappearance.Critical Chris (talk) 17:26, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

It was in the infobox, a head-shot...where did it go?Critical Chris (talk) 00:22, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
I suppose if you have US$2.7 billion, or if you'll be the next US Treasury Secretary, you can -try- for a while to make -some things- dissappear right?Critical Chris (talk) 08:26, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Mkrysinski, you appear to have come back twice and edited the article into a blank page.  Was this vandalism or a good faith edit?Critical Chris (talk) 09:43, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

If you look at his contribution history, all his edits have been vandalistic. Check his talk page history and you'll find evidence of previous vandalism warnings that he subsequently erased. I have blocked him indefinitely. --22:59, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
Who are you Sir/Madam?  Do you wish to identify yourself by signing your comment?Critical Chris (talk) 08:23, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
Sure, I'm A. B.; I mistakenly used ~~~~~ instead of ~~~~ when signing my comment above. --A. B. (talk •  contribs)  16:21, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

FYI, see:

Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard#Penny Pritzker and other Pritzker family articles (permanent link)
--A. B. (talk •  contribs)  18:16, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

just fixed an error introduced back in 2008. Frietjes (talk) 19:49, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

I find it a bit strange to call her a philanthropist in the opening lines, as looking at the subsection about it there is only very thin evidence for anything philanthropic. She supports education - so does every teacher on the planet. Seriously, looking deeper into her philanthropic activities, it's mostly business oriented and nice whitewashing. Sure, she does something, but compare that to real philanthropists out there. Also given that she shows disappointment over the "Safe Harbour" decision in the EU, where 700M people's privacy wasn't respected, I think it's plain wrong to call her a philanthropist. 700M versus help for some Chicagoans? Do the math.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.141.212.74 (talk) 15:40, 7 October 2015 (UTC) 

Worse even, the Pritzkers are not humane http://peoplesworld.org/hotel-workers-strike-the-grand-hyatt/ and http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/hyatt-turns-heat-lamps-on-strikers/  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:46:1A7B:B00A:19E4:5706:34D7:E3FD (talk) 12:42, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Putting this article on the talk page as a possible future source. Knope7 (talk) 04:20, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

This contains mostly personal questions but also includes a little family history.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Penny Pritzker/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Slightlymad (talk · contribs) 05:25, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

@Knope7: I will be doing this. Slightlymad 05:25, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar):  b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism): 

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 

It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 

Overall:
Pass/Fail: 


#### General comments
I did some slight copyedit and I've resolved the remainder of the issues I raised as I don't think I made myself clear about them. I shall now mark this as a pass given that there's no more problems with the article. Good work. Slightlymad 05:46, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

I have converted the mention of the Paradise Papers to a footnote and included a source which specifically deals with Pritzker and her response. From what I can tell, although the papers indicate a discrepancy with her previous disclosures, the story doesn't seem to have developed beyond that yet. If it becomes a bigger issue, I am happy to re-evaluate how we treat this material. Knope7 (talk) 04:02, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Penny S. Pritzker ’81, is senior fellow of the Harvard Corporation — the University’s highest governing body. This should be included in this wiki article as her role may be critical in the determination of whether Harvard's President Gay remains at her post following Gay's recent controversial testimony on Capitol Hill. 2600:1700:1FF0:19F0:4DA3:E547:82A1:CE13 (talk) 14:29, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Included, especially now that scrutiny is mentioned in a number of RS specifically about Pritzker's role. Jjazz76 (talk) 04:18, 9 January 2024 (UTC)