Talk:Carlos Slim

message: 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)
thread_title:  Ottoman Empire

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Deleted Helu 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Sons 

message: 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)
replies: text: it's possible Helú | Pronunciation of Helú in Spanish (youglish.com) Brawlio (talk) 01:23, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: Follow-up: It only took a minute to implement this plan, so I just did it now. — Lumbercutter 23:11, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Richest 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Correction 

message: 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)
thread_title: Please don't remove footnotes

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

message: 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)
thread_title:  OLPC 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Forbes mistake? 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  How the **** did this guy become so rich? 

message: ::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)
thread_title: Reopening this thread

message: 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)
replies: text: The article is Forbes list of billionaires. Jim Michael (talk) 08:35, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  World's richest man redirection 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Worth 

message: 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)
thread_title: Helú

message: 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)
thread_title:  CompUSA 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Dry goods store 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Telmex 

message: 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)
replies: text: "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)

text: 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)

text: The money he donates gets back into his pockets due to the reducton of taxes --Scandza (talk) 03:44, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

text: 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)

text: 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)
thread_title:  Can we please stop calling tycoons philanthropists?

message: 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)
thread_title:  Personal life 

message: This article is getting vandalized. Please lock it if the vandalism continues. Thanks. 174.16.163.180 (talk) 05:14, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title: Vandalism

message: 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)
thread_title:  Tonight's usage of Carlos Slim's own website for citations 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Slim's wife DOB 

message: In the personal wealth section.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.44.93.16 (talk) 07:22, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Not Fortune, but Forbes 

message: 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)
thread_title:  What he is known for: 

message: 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)
replies: text: Celso Garrido is not unknown. See :es:Celso Garrido Noguera. Fridek (talk) 18:34, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Who? 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: I got my figure for his net worth from Wikipedia's Bill Gates article.  Jroberts.757 (talk) 21:37, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: You cannot use that - see WP:Circular. - Sitush (talk) 21:40, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title: Net worth

message: 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)
replies: text: For what purpose? Are they not clear enough? - Sitush (talk) 11:22, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Hatnotes

message: 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)
thread_title:  Maronite Christian vs Maronite Catholic 

message: 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:
#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?
#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
#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)
replies: text: ... and your point in relation to my proposal and the article is? - Sitush (talk) 19:41, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent page protection 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)

text: 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)
thread_title:  Religion of Slim's parents 

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

message: 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)
thread_title:  Spanish words 

message: 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)
thread_title:  "Honorary Titles" 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title: Richer than Bill Gates

message: , 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  monopolist 

message: 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)
thread_title:  corrected links 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Real time net worth 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Cleanup/Issue tags 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Blacklisted Links Found on [[Carlos Slim]] 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Wealth / ranking 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Carlos Slim. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20140723081507/http://www.m2magazine.co.nz/pdf/M2AUIssue20/files/13.html to http://www.m2magazine.co.nz/pdf/M2AUIssue20/files/13.html
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20150518121406/http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/money/2013/05/19/carlos-slim-purchase-mexican-soccer-teams-sets-showdown-with-television-giant to http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/money/2013/05/19/carlos-slim-purchase-mexican-soccer-teams-sets-showdown-with-television-giant
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20130517013645/http://finance.yahoo.com/news/bill-gates-retakes-worlds-richest-200913309.html to http://finance.yahoo.com/news/bill-gates-retakes-worlds-richest-200913309.html
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120702203355/http://www.demotix.com:80/news/870422/inauguration-marian-plaza-basilica-guadeloupe-mexico to http://www.demotix.com/news/870422/inauguration-marian-plaza-basilica-guadeloupe-mexico#media-870400
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20130114035857/http://www.virgendeguadalupe.org.mx:80/PM/ind_plaza_datos_generales_2010.htm to http://www.virgendeguadalupe.org.mx/PM/ind_plaza_datos_generales_2010.htm
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20131203002054/https://provost.gwu.edu/sites/provost.gwu.edu/files/downloads/Honorary_Degrees_Past_Recipients%20%28WITHOUT%20honoris%20causa%29_1.pdf to https://provost.gwu.edu/sites/provost.gwu.edu/files/downloads/Honorary_Degrees_Past_Recipients%20%28WITHOUT%20honoris%20causa%29_1.pdf
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110315234159/http://www.scrippsnews.com:80/node/25270 to http://www.scrippsnews.com/node/25270
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:01, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: 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.()".
: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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: I think "claimed" sounds POV. Why not "suggested" instead?Zigzig20s (talk) 01:11, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: "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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: OK thanks, I've added your version with "suggested" as per consensus.Zigzig20s (talk) 01:31, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

text: 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)
replies: text: 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)

text: [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)
replies: text: See my comment above on consensus. Acroterion (talk) 01:53, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

text: 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)
replies: text: 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)

text: 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)
replies: text: 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)

text: The comment above by Zigzig20s  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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: What am I opposing? I don't understand. I am only trying to reach consensus here.Zigzig20s (talk) 03:14, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

text: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Accusations of influencing the 2016 US presidential election 

message: 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)
replies: text: "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)
replies: text: 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"  Wsulek (talk) 21:56, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title: Does He Own the New York Times?

message: 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)
thread_title:  Ties to Mexican Cartels? Seems noteworthy, although I would never write about this if I lived in Mexico.  

message: 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121214085457/http://topics.bloomberg.com/bloomberg-billionaires-index/ to http://topics.bloomberg.com/bloomberg-billionaires-index/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:19, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110724093805/http://formula-one.speedtv.com/article/f1-sauber-signs-sergio-perez-sponsor-telmex-for-2011/ to http://formula-one.speedtv.com/article/f1-sauber-signs-sergio-perez-sponsor-telmex-for-2011/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101017201345/http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_10/b4024065.htm?campaign_id=rss_magzn to http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_10/b4024065.htm?campaign_id=rss_magzn
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:52, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150518081156/http://www.achievement.org/autodoc/page/sli0int-3 to http://www.achievement.org/autodoc/page/sli0int-3
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131409360600/http://www.achievement.org/autodoc/page/sli0bio-1 to http://www.achievement.org/autodoc/page/sli0bio-1
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121322071600/http://www.achievement.org/autodoc/photocredit/achievers/sli0-014 to http://www.achievement.org/autodoc/photocredit/achievers/sli0-014
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131102095531/http://www.bornrich.com/real-estate-trend-billionaires-buying-american-mansions.html to http://www.bornrich.com/real-estate-trend-billionaires-buying-american-mansions.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:57, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Mexican telecoms magnate