Talk:Omar Amanat

message: thanks to the intervention of senior administrators, the vandalism and slander has finally ceased.  barkleyparamus should get the point and not make wikipedia a soapbox.
Rumination 21:41, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: vandalism ceased

message: There are two sides to every story, and most certainly two sides to this man.
Please don't call this slander, b/c it's truth.  Again, I can prove it with documentation.  If you let me post it to the site, I will.
You may call this my soap box for complaints or whatever, but that's because in 4 years the legal system has not come to a conclusion.  This is my only other alternative to broadcast truths about this individual.    I ask that you do not take it away from me.  I will post the supporting promissory note to this site, and then will you allow it to stay up here?
The case number is 04-12078 in New York.  Anyone who wants to can look it up.  This is real, and this is truth.
you may say I'm whining and crying on this site, but if you performed work for months and did not get paid a large percentage of what was owed, you would be very upset as well.  It would be inhuman not to be.
Think of all the people I may be able to help, by posting this information. Anyone who may conduct business with Omar in the future should know about his past that I had direct experience with.
For any questions, I can be reached at barkleyparamus@yahoo.com —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 209.191.246.3 (talk • contribs) 21:18, 6 September 2006.
:Wikipedia is not the place for original research or the airing of personal grievances. We should only include information in Wikipedia articles which can be accurately sourced to reliable, credible sources. --ⁿɡ͡b Nick Boalch\talk 21:30, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  My so called vandalism and slander.   Truth is not slander 

message: This is from Omar's wiki page..."Mr. Amanat was also recently the Founder, CEO and majority shareholder of Tradescape Corp, a financial technology firm that processed over 10% of NASDAQ's daily trading volume and was the largest electronic brokerage firm (by trading volume) in the United States when he sold it to E*Trade Financial in 2002 for consideration worth $280 million."
It makes me sick to know I was one of the traders generating all this volume and revenue, and that 4 years later I am still holding an unpaid promissory note for just under $26,000.
barkleyparamus@yahoo.com —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 209.191.246.3 (talk • contribs) 21:24, 6 September 2006.
:While you may well be sick, your promissory note nevertheless has no place in our article. This is an encyclopaedia, not a repository for trivia and accusations. --ⁿɡ͡b Nick Boalch\talk 21:31, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nauseating Quote 

message: Barkleyparamus's allegations notwithstanding, this article is pretty poor in terms of its citing of sources. It makes some very specific unsourced claims ('named one of Wall Street's "Top Ten Most Influential Technologists"' -- when? who by?) and contains some biographical and business information that we would do well to source properly. Can anyone help with providing references? --ⁿɡ͡b Nick Boalch\talk 21:35, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources 

message: This article has been tagged for some time by editors and administrators who have noted the utter lack of reliable sources for the data presented. Per Wikipedia's verifiability standards, it is incumbent upon the writers of articles to cite reliable, published sources for the data presented; not upon the readers to go find that data. Since the article currently asserts its subject's notability based on data that cannot be verified within the article itself, it may be recommended for deletion at any time. RadioKirk (u|t|c) 21:15, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible [[WP:AFD|deletion]] of article 

message: The last attempt was much better; this time, sources were included. The problem (and why it was deleted wholesale the moment I saw it) was it copied from those sources verbatim, in violation of Wiki copyright policy and, at least as importantly, US copyright law. The entry must be in the editors' own words; it must include phrases such as "accused of" (or it suggests a conviction where none exists, in violation of libel laws); and, it must include any equally reliably sourced rebuttal. RadioKirk (u|t|c) 03:23, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If that were the case, you would be strongly advised to read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest before editing the article. This is standard advice, and following the guideline is in the best interests of editors, even if they don't see why it is there (editing within the guideline avoids problems that may not be understood by those new to Wikipedia). Secondly, any mention of a legal case must be backed up by reliable, independently published sources. Thirdly, whatever facts are added to the article, the treatment must be neutral, and the policy on biographies of living people must be followed closely. Charles Matthews (talk) 20:24, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Lawsuit

message: The chief IP used by this user has been blocked for one month for violating US copyright law and non-negotiable Wikipedia policy by repeatedly inserting source material verbatim into a Wikipedia article. This is not about "truth", Mr. Paramus, this is about breaking the law. Further attempts to insert copyrighted material will result in blocks of any/all users involved and will be referred to the Wikimedia Foundation for potential action. RadioKirk (u|t|c) 14:48, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please read WP:V and WP:NPOV. The suit can be mentioned only if these policies and guidelines can be followed; previous attempts to add this information have been anything but neutral, and often did not attempt to cite a reliable source. Simply adding the link is not sufficient; the context—written as required by WP:BLP—is necessary. RadioKirk (u|t|c) 18:27, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: IP blocked one month

message: Vandal "omartruth" is attempting to make wikipedia a soapbox for personal vendetta using innaccurate data. Potentially libelous information. J araneo (talk) 20:47, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: omartruth

message: Omar Amanat was never "the primary investor in Bridges TV." As a public lawsuit in New York State Supreme Court makes clear he pulled out in 2003 and never invested any money. In any event the edit was inconsistent with NPOV and is potentially libelous given the recent headline news regarding the murders at Bridges.
Also the mention of the Etrade litigation is poorly sourced and inconsistent with NPOV and the subject of previous discussions long settled by admins RadioKirk and Nick Boalch (currently on admin leave)  Specifically there was a $1.5 Billion lawsuit filed by Mr Amanat where one side says the targets were met and the other not. Wikipedia is not the place to settle such controversies and is in violation of NPOV in any instance. J araneo (talk) 01:50, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: *Saying that sides have sued each other for "breach of contract, among other claims" would be ideal wording if the sources back that up.  About Bridges TV, I'm concerned that we have replaced cited facts with non-cited ones.  Per your request for reprieve,  I'm going to change the words to the effect that he was involved with Bridges TV early on, but I will leave out the fact that he was the major investor per your statement that sources can be found that contradict this.  Please add those sources to the article as soon as possible as this article must be getting increased hits right now and should be as fit as we can make it.  It is appropriate to characterize Bridges TV as "the Muslin television network headed by Muzzammil S. Hassan".  This isn't libel, it's pretty standard encyclopedic verbiage to mention peoples' connection to other well-known people whose names a reader might recognize.  The text you introduced saying "Darfur Now featuring George Clooney" is an example of the same thing.  Whether people referred to in this way are illustrious or notorious is irrelevant as long as the verbiage does not insinuate guilt by association.  We would not, for example, say that "Amanat partnered with alleged murderer Muzzammil S. Hassan."  Thanks for your help in making improvements.  Boston (talk) 08:40, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Bridges TV]] and [[E*Trade]]

message: it seems that anonymous user with IP address  83.145.225.26  is trying to slander subject with unsourced material and is engaged in an edit war in violation of the 3 edit rule. please help  Rumination (talk) 01:50, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Facts about marriages, where relevant, may have to be backed up by explicit references to reliable, published sources. Charles Matthews (talk) 22:38, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

text: I am not arguing that the Variety article is true in what it says. The existence of the piece in Variety explains why the edits are being made. We do have to look at this more deeply to understand what can appear in this article. Charles Matthews (talk) 12:01, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

text: Removed once more. It is claimed that there is a published source (not perhaps reliable), and a reliable source in court records which are not apparently published. As that stands there is not enough to include the form of words being placed the article. Charles Matthews (talk) 16:57, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

text: According to Wikipedia:Reliable sources, the basic material for Wikipedia is secondary sources. "Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable secondary sources." And we are looking for published material. Simply asserting that some facts are somewhere in accessible databases does not amount to the kind of sourcing we are looking for. If you have access to such records, no doubt you can supply some circumstantial details that will at least make plausible what you claim. I have to warn you, though, that continuing to post the same material with disregard for the discussion here is likely to have consequences for your editing status. Charles Matthews (talk) 20:29, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

text: That is not really correct. The policy on removal of unsourced material is being applied. What is important is to emphasise that it will be applied to this article, so that it is pointless to keep on adding material without proper references. Charles Matthews (talk) 22:35, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

text: I think you don't understand. It is not a question of the opinions of contributors to the article: biographical information must be independently verifiable from published sources. And that is not all. If there is no particular reason to include information about relatives, it should not appear in the article, even if there are adequate sources. This is an encyclopedia, not a newspaper column, and this site is not for posting gossip. Charles Matthews (talk) 22:28, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Family Life]]

message: I requested a week's semi-protection of the article. It is clear that there are still disagreements on the detailed content of the article. Changes ought to be made on the basis of documentation, using this week as an opportunity to ensure neutral and appropriate content of the page. Charles Matthews (talk) 16:00, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Semi-protection and referencing

message: Reluctantly, I've semi-protected the talk header as well. BLP violations anywhere on wikipedia are a serious matter and cannot be treated lightly. If you wish to make an edit to the talk header or to the article, please create an account --RegentsPark (sticks and stones) 03:03, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Talk page semi-protected

message: not sure why his educational information was deleted but I believe consistent with biographies of living people, it should be included.  If any reason why let me know J araneo (talk) 22:51, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed on 4 November  some educational information. It was supported by a webpage citation, not by independent publication of the details. I wasn't convinced that the website was an independent, reliable source. Charles Matthews (talk) 23:12, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

text: Under Wikipedia:Reliable sources, section on self-published sources, I don't find either of the Alacra Wiki or classicalmusic.com websites to be a reliable source on a strict reading. According to Wikipedia:Biographies of living people, section Maintaining biographies of living persons, "When in doubt, biographies should be pared back to a version that is sourced to good quality sources, neutral, and on-topic." There is a basic problem with this article, which is the shortage of good quality sources, and absent those it is likely that this article will remain concise. Charles Matthews (talk) 08:22, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

text: Page at WhartonDC.com belongs to a club, not any university. There is the obvious problem that if they just post details supplied by their invited speakers, then this cannot be considered a third-party source. Charles Matthews (talk) 10:05, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

text: I'm certainly concerned at the low quality of sourcing of biographical information in this article. Charles Matthews (talk) 12:18, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

text: In both places I read He is currently working on launching the first Muslim American cable and satellite channel in the United States. I'm not able to verify the claim about the Einstein techology award. Some groups of people were given this award in 1999, 2000 and 2001. I haven't been able to check whether Amanat was among those. Subsequently (and this is quite confusing) the same award was given for different achievements. The absence of clear dates for the biographical information is one of my major concerns about verifiability in the article. There is no date of birth, and no date for any educational attainment. Charles Matthews (talk) 12:28, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Education

message: I have added a PROD template, because there seems no way currently to bring the article up to standard, the references being brought forward being flawed and contested, and not obviously reliable even by quite low standards. If this PROD is contested, then we have to move to a serious application of WP:RS, line by line. Charles Matthews (talk) 12:45, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: A simple search turns up  and . Looks like he has produced (or was a producer of) several movies and was the CEO of tradescape. I'm removing the prod and suggest reducing the article to its stubby essence (produced movies and was ceo of tradescape) instead. If flawed references continue to be added to the article, protect it (or ask me or another admin to do it if you consider yourself involved) --RegentsPark (sticks and stones) 13:18, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I consider myself involved. He has been executive producer (i.e. financier) of films. This is not in dispute. Nor is the fact that he used to be involved in financial trading (the article from 2000, which contains much speculative froth). All this means is that some deals took place. Charles Matthews (talk) 14:04, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: OK. I stubbed it for you and will watch for the quality of sources for any new material that is added to the article. --RegentsPark (sticks and stones) 16:30, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed deletion

message: The article reports a total compensation number that includes 'contingent' compensation. Apparently, E*Trade had a subsequent dispute with Amanat and I'm wondering if the total compensation number ever became actuality. Comments, with reliable sources are welcome. --RegentsPark (sticks and stones) 15:20, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Acquisition by E*Trade 

message: not sure why the continual edit wars are re-occurring over this long established article. One of the earlier articles on notable businessmen published on wikepedia. 
J araneo (talk) 05:52, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: My own investigations into references for this article, as well as those of others, find little enough solid factual information. The time elapsed since the article's creation has little to do with it. Charles Matthews (talk) 06:46, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit war

message: A blogger posted a purported letter from a film company that makes twilight films. The blogger slanderously interpreted the letter to call Mr. Amanat an imposter whereby the Letter itself makes no such claims. There is no confirmation from Summit as to whether the letter is real and moreover, the letter from Summit itself makes no such claim and only references that Mr Amanat is not "currently a director, officer etc" and cites an earlier letter regarding a charitable screening of twilight. To devote three paragraphs to this immaterial, not well sourced issue does not seem to be in the best interest of the reader. Mr. Amanat's response posted by another blogger is not cited so this is not consistent with NPOV.
J araneo (talk) 16:53, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The Deadline Hollywood blog by Nikki Finke would probably not qualify as a "reliable source" under Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources#Self-published sources (online and paper). Blogs generally are "largely not acceptable". According to the next paragraph of that policy, however, and given that, if our own article on Finke is to be believed, "In 2009 she sold Deadline to Jay Penske's Mail.com Media Corp, reportedly for $14 Million, under an agreement by which she continues as the writer and editor of the website", there might be some room for argument on editorial control. In the light of Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Avoid self-published sources no benefit of the doubt can be given in this case: the only reason for inclusion could be that Finke does not have editorial control. Charles Matthews (talk) 21:36, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

text: The issue of NPOV does not arise if the matter is confined to such marginal sources. Under BLP policy claims made of such a nature really cannot be included at all in Wikipedia without better support. Charles Matthews (talk) 07:56, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Blogger article Summit letter

message: Is it appropriate to include details about Tradescape such as "Tradescape is reported to have processed 7% of NASDAQ's daily trading volume and was named one of the "Top 50 Private Companies in the United States" with annual revenues of $250 million."? It seems off-topic to me. The dollar amount that it sold for to E*TRADE should be enough details, in my opinion. Jesanj (talk) 22:40, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: A recent edit added material I find off-topic. Amanat worked at Datek for a year after undergrad. Whatever Datek sold for has no verified relevance to Amanat. I don't see any source that says Amanat played any key role at the company. It serves as an example of Wikipedia:Wikipuffery. The NYT source doesn't mention Amanat. It should be removed. Jesanj (talk) 00:28, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:TOPIC]] 

message: I haven't read the source, but what is "surviving" 9/11. Was he wounded? Seriously? Critically? I keep seeing fluff pop up in this article. Why? Jesanj (talk) 20:06, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The article says the "twin towers collapsed, leaving 500 of his employees out of work". Did all of his employees survive? What business was this? Jesanj (talk) 20:29, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Surviving" 9/11 & fluff 

message: This article was recently published in the Daily Mail: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-3132778/GIRL-TOWN-Naomi-nobbles-gatecrasher-45th-birthday-bash.html
Perhaps this text can be included in the article:
According to the Daily Mail, in June of 2015, Omar Amanat  arrived, apparently uninvited, to Naomi Campbell's party. Reportedly, Amanat was asked to leave, at which point he tried to ban Campbell for life from the Aman Resort chain. A spokesman from Aman Resorts commented: ‘Mr Amanat is not a representative. We very much look forward to welcoming Naomi’s continued patronage.’ 
What do other Wiki editors think?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.126.96.139 (talk) 13:43, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Reads a little bit like tittle tattle to me; for the dispute over the ownership of the resort there are probably better sourced articles.  But feel free to Be Bold!. --Legis (talk - contribs) 17:07, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  New referenced content? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Omar Amanat. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090225161855/http://www.aljazeerah.info/News%20archives/2003%20News%20archives/May%202003%20News/3%20n/First%20American%20Muslim%20Television%20Channel%20Announced%20by%20Bridges%20Network..htm to http://www.aljazeerah.info/News%20archives/2003%20News%20archives/May%202003%20News/3%20n/First%20American%20Muslim%20Television%20Channel%20Announced%20by%20Bridges%20Network..htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110122140232/http://www.oprah.com/oprahradio/Global-Philanthropist-Omar-Amanat to http://www.oprah.com/oprahradio/Global-Philanthropist-Omar-Amanat
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120329104356/http://islamicamagazine.com/?p=722 to http://islamicamagazine.com/?p=722
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:15, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hi all,
I'm a new Wikipedia editor, so excuse me if this is out of line, but this page seems to have a very prominent COI editor in "J araneo" damaging the value of the page.  Specifically, I'm not sure why this editor feels the need to make the out-of-date claim that Amanat is still the Chairman of Aman Resorts, when this has not been the case since 2014.  Aman's Leadership page at https://www.aman.com/leadership will confirm that Vladislav Doronin is now the Chairman.  In addition, I agree with the recent IP editor's assessment that the current version of the page contains far too much detail into the legal battle over Aman Resorts and is in violation of WP:UNDUE.
A look at J araneo's list of contributions makes it clear that he is a one-issue editor who has almost exclusively been editing this page and other related pages since he joined in December 2005.  In addition, he admitted a relationship to Amanat's MarketXT company in his edit here.  Isn't this the type of COI editor who is strongly discouraged and/or banned from editing the page?
I am now returning the page to the way it was before J Areneo reverted those previous edits.  Jeremy Harrison (talk) 11:05, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  COI Editor?? 

message: Hi all, 
I just did some extensive research looking for a recent mention of Amanat as the chairman of Aman Resorts, and there is not one mention in a long list of recent articles about Amanat (see below). There is one article that directly states, referring to Amanat and a "Russian-born real estate developer (Vladislav Doronin):"While the pair started as co-investors, they wound up as rivals, battling in courts in the U.K. and U.S. for control, which Amanat lost."
This source is more recent than the source that is being used to make the outdated claim that Amanat is the chairman. He is no longer the chairman, so please do not put this incorrect information back on the Wiki.
Here are some of the other articles from as recent as May, 2017, which describes in detail what Amanat has been up to recently, and none of it includes being chairman of Aman Resorts. Editors coming across this discussion are welcome to use the following sources to put together a more accurate and up to date discussion of Omar Amanat on the article space.
How big was influence of Huma Abedin's family?: World Net Daily
New Arrest in Fraud Probe of Bankrupt Video Tech Firm: Fortune
Amanat Arrested on fraud charges: Page Six
New York entrepreneur Amanat indicted for fraud scheme: Reuters
Omar Amanat can’t afford to make bail: Page Six
The Mystery Behind Wall Street’s Wildest Party: Fortune
---   Jeremy Harrison (talk) 07:38, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Omar Amanat is definitely NOT the chairman of Aman Resorts