Talk:Forbes 400

message: He is listed 14th in his article, why so high here? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 146.187.151.99 (talk) 21:59, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Adelson

message: Forbes publishes many lists, not just American and world's richest people. It also covers celebrities, companies, and families, to name a few. This article is not the place to try to mention all those other lists. Here are a few examples:
* Celebrity 100: Where the Money Is
* China's 400 Richest
* Taiwan's 40 Richest
* Hong Kong's 40 Richest
The list goes on; we can't catalog it here.  Frank    talk  15:12, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: My addition was ONLY the other list of global billionaires, not a cataloging of all of them (the lists by country are merely extracts from that larger list).  I think it is relevant to mention just that main global one, because it's coexistence with the Forbes 400 can lead to unusual, sometimes contradictory conclusions. (example: based on the March 2008 global list the world's youngest billionaire is Albert von Thurn und Taxis, but based on the 2008 Forbes 400 it is Mark Zuckerberg. Beacuase of this I would like to re-add the single mention (slightly reworded) if ok with you.  UnitedStatesian (talk) 15:37, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This article is about the Forbes 400 list, not other lists, and not about apparent contradictions (which really aren't, since they are at different times). I understand the addition was "only" one other list, but where does it stop? As I indicated, there are many, many other lists; only some are shown above. Wikipedia is not a news source and it is not our place to be constantly keeping up with lists, and it isn't appropriate to start bringing other lists into this article. Remember - this article is about the fact that there is such a list. It is not a rehashing of the list itself. The individuals on the list may be notable, and if so, would have articles (and quite a number of them do).  Frank    talk  15:42, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

text: In addition, the other list you mention is already referred to  here, and some of the ones Forbes publishes are mentioned here. I would think that a link to one or both of those in a "see also" section would be appropriate.  Frank    talk  15:46, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

text: And, in fact, the "list of billionaires" is already in the "see also" section.  Frank    talk  15:47, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Understood; I tried a different approach.  What do you think about the add (I think it provides good context to point out that the 400 is only one of many). UnitedStatesian (talk) 16:13, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks good to me!  Frank    talk  16:23, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Forbes Lists 

message: http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2011/0921/Forbes-400-fuels-class-warfare-fire-The-rich-yes-are-getting-richer   See Overclass, Superclass, Talk:Global financial system,  141.218.36.50 (talk) 20:37, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Forbes 400 fuels 'class warfare' fire: The rich, yes, are getting richer.  The annual Forbes 400 list of wealthiest Americans has landed amid heated rhetoric over 'class warfare.' Members saw their net worth ($1.53 trillion combined) rise 12 percent in the past year. is the title.  99.181.150.29 (talk) 03:18, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: What is a Class war (Class warfare is a different link)?  99.181.131.7 (talk) 04:08, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  More content ... [[csmonitor.com]] 

message: I was not aware of that. 71.212.249.87 (talk) 01:41, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  You can trademark facts? 

message: I've removed italics ("Forbes 400", not "Forbes 400" or "Forbes 400") except where "Forbes" clearly refers to the magazine and not to the list itself. If anyone changes it back, please explain your reasoning in doing so here.
We don't italicize "Fortune 500" even though Fortune is also a magazine just as Forbes is. Also, observe that Forbes itself, on its website, doesn't italicize "Forbes 400". Use of italics with "Forbes 400" was inconsistent within the text of the article; indeed, the majority of occurrences of the name within the text were not italicized. I've made it consistently non-italicized throughout.
—Syrenka V (talk) 09:38, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Italics