Jump to content

Talk:Elon Musk

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Page semi-protected
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Former featured article candidateElon Musk is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Good articleElon Musk has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Did You Know Article milestones
DateProcessResult
June 4, 2021Good article nomineeListed
July 24, 2021Peer reviewNot reviewed
August 23, 2022Featured article candidateNot promoted
November 1, 2022Good article reassessmentKept
Did You Know A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on June 15, 2021.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Elon Musk lost $16.3 billion in a single day, the largest in the history of the Bloomberg Billionaires Index?
Current status: Former featured article candidate, current good article

RfC: Opening paragraph and linking child articles

Should the sentence "His political activities and views have made him a polarizing figure." be added to the end of the opening paragraph to further establish context for notability, and to include links to child articles earlier in lead? RFCBEFORE: here and here. Edit: corrected the wikilinks as shown in diff.

Yes/No. Feel free to suggest alternative wording, the above is based on current lead wording.[1] CNC (talk) 11:23, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

At present I believe there is a clear imbalance of child article linking in the opening paragraph that I consider to be gatekeeping. I also think this fits better with summary style guidelines, and while it's not explicitly a guideline to link relevant/notable child articles in the opening paragraph, it's good practice to do so when convenient and possible to do so. Based on view count also, which is correlated to notability, there are far more views for the Views article, with Business career being as popular as Political activities and Public image. At present, there are in fact 10x more views for the Views article than there are for business career which speaks volumes. So I'm in disagreement with others that believe the most notable aspect of Musk is his business career, (whereas the Wealth article quite clearly is for example). So it'd be nice to give the reader "what they want", rather than having to scroll down to find the article they are likely looking for. Musk family, Legal affairs of Elon Musk, and Acquisition of Twitter by Elon Musk, are otherwise referenced in the second paragraph, and I think are well suited there given the context of notability not being quite as significant. CNC (talk) 11:29, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, although there's definitely room to tweak the wording. At this point his controversial politics are clearly his primary source of notability and are not being given enough focus in the lead; one mention of DOGE in a list is plainly insufficient. This is a reasonable start if we want to cram it into a single sentence. --Aquillion (talk) 20:36, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • No. In my opinion, the proposed sentence steps a little too far into synthesis. Alternatively, it could mention his declining approval ratings. It could also emphasize the controversial acts of DOGE. Dw31415 (talk) 01:12, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The links should be adjusted to accord with MOS:LINKCLARITY. The way the links are currently formatted in the current lead is better: His political activities and views have made him a polarizing figure. ―Panamitsu (talk) 01:18, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for noticing, I misplaced the links per the diff I was referencing. I've corrected that now, as doesn't appear to change this discussion aside from your comment, and this timestamp serves as the timestamp for that edit. CNC (talk) 09:56, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No as per @Dw31415. All Tomorrows No Yesterdays (Ughhh.... What did I do wrong this time?) 13:40, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No, although not on the grounds of SYNTH. I would argue that it (and any other opinions on him) would not be DUE. There are more polarizing figures than Musk (e.g. Erdogan, Putin, possibly Fauci) that don't have it in the opening paragraph. Wildfireupdateman :) (talk) 19:39, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I would suggest the word "controversial" instead of "polarizing" since it's a more common and understandable word. Doesn't seem like SYNTH to me, it's the reality. Illegally 15:18, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes.[[2]]speaks of the opening paragarph to establishing the context in which the topic is being considered. The DOGE of which Musk is "in charge", in its creation and subsequent actions has been the subject of significant controvesy including protests and ongoing Lawsuits. In terms of Musk's significant out-lier role in Trump's election and the everyday and apparently far-reaching impact (as opposed to mere recency), of DOGE, a resounding yes. Rigorousmortal (talk) 18:45, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes – per nom. Also a pretty neutral statement. Left- and right-wing figures alike can be polarizing. 🐔 Chicdat  Bawk to me! 17:22, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No. It's undue and poor article writing to tag someone as controversial before explaining any part of their background. — Goszei (talk) 20:47, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, although I would also support changing polarizing to controversial - Per summary style. The vast majority of the multiple articles of text discusses the controversies around this man, and that makes up the bulk of his notability. Perhaps once upon a time his notoriety was based primarily on his wealth and business practices, but that is clearly, plainly, and demonstrably no longer the case, by sheer weight of article coverage alone. Fieari (talk) 00:06, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

main image

there is an image of musk today that should be the main image. it is high quality and depicts him as recently as possible. what do you all think? Wcamp9 (talk) 02:39, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is very grainy so I wouldn't consider it high quality enough. It isn't particularly formal either considering that he's laughing. ―Panamitsu (talk) 03:49, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
the fact that he is laughing is fair, but it is pretty high quality despite being grainy. When the image is displayed on the infobox, it is not going to be seen as grainy. I see it as higher quality than the current main image Wcamp9 (talk) 13:32, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It is incredibly grainy. That diminishes all the benefits of high quality. Aaron Liu (talk) 13:40, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
While it may diminish the high quality image, it is recent and a good depiction of Musk. In the infobox, the image will seem normal, despite incredible graininess. Try editing the article and putting the image in and you will know what I mean. Same situation for the infobox image of LeBron James Wcamp9 (talk) 16:47, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We shouldn't use a photo of someone with his eyes closed if there are other options available --FMSky (talk) 16:49, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
fair enough Wcamp9 (talk) 18:18, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have a computer monitor, which is probably much bigger than your screen. Aaron Liu (talk) 17:00, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We currently have a relatively recent, good-quality image with a usable license. "I found a new one on the internets today!!!" is not a reason to change the current one, the Wikipedia is not Elon Musk's social media page. Zaathras (talk) 00:18, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, even if his eyes weren't closed here, the current image is just better in every way; it's not like this image features him with a different appearance. Aaron Liu (talk) 11:18, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Leader of DOGE

I know the RfC just finished but most comments were before the court ruling, which I believe is critical and is precisely what was being discussed in the RfC. To quote the infobox on the DOGE page: On March 18, 2025, the United States District Court for the District of Maryland determined that Elon Musk was "the leader of DOGE" and was exercising the authority of its lawful administrator on a de facto basis.[1][2][3] Yeshivish613 (talk) 19:38, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Public image --> Second paragraph --> Incorporate into Lead

Every day more and more people realize who actually has all the power in Washington right now. The article's reference to this is buried deep within. I'm glad it is there, but I think it would be better to rewire that 2nd paragraph into the lead section, specifically in the last paragraph about his political activity. We need to at least allude to how he's basically the POTUS right now. For example:

He has engaged in political activities in several countries, including as a vocal and financial supporter of Trump. Musk has been described as an American oligarch due to his extensive influence over public discourse, social media, industry, politics, and government policy in the United States. Musk was the largest donor in the 2024 U.S. presidential election and is a supporter of global far-right figures, causes, and political parties. After Trump's re-election, Musk's influence and actions during the transition period and the second presidency of Donald Trump led some to call him "President Musk", the "actual president-elect", "shadow president" or "co-president". Ee100duna (talk) 03:40, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We need a lot more than these to make such a claim. Slatersteven (talk) 11:08, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Evidence of his influence:
[3] Trump holds Cabinet meeting with Elon Musk in attendance
[4] Trump and Musk appear together in the Oval Office to defend the work of DOGE
Sources specifically saying "President Musk"
[5] Elon Musk is President (opinion piece)
[6] Trump himself has jokingly referred to this
[7] Press release from Democrats' house page
[8] Ad by the Lincoln Project Ee100duna (talk) 15:03, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I might not have clarified in my initial post. The example I provided is the wording that is already in the article and it is appropriately sourced and formatted already. All I'm saying is to move that into the lead section because it is relevant to what he is currently doing. Ee100duna (talk) 15:05, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am unsure (given we are only 3 months in) that this is anything moremthan recentism. Let's wait and see if this is a lasting influence or if he will be rthreown under a bus like everyone else by Trumpy. Slatersteven (talk) 10:36, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ Lee, Ella (March 18, 2025). "Judge finds Elon Musk likely acted unconstitutionally in shuttering USAID". The Hill. Retrieved March 18, 2025. It marks the first time a judge has ruled that Musk is likely exercising enough independent authority to require him to be confirmed by the Senate under the Appointments Clause. "The record of his activities to date establishes that his role has been and will continue to be as the leader of DOGE, with the same duties and degree of continuity as if he was formally in that position,'" wrote Chuang, an appointee of former President Obama. Chuang rejected the Trump administration's argument that Musk is not the DOGE administrator and is instead merely a senior adviser to the president who has no independent authority.
  2. ^ Shalal, Andrea; Bose, Nandita (2025-02-20). "Trump appears to contradict White House, says Elon Musk in charge of DOGE". Reuters. Archived from the original on 2025-02-20. Retrieved 2025-02-20. 'I signed an order creating the Department of Government Efficiency and put a man named Elon Musk in charge,' Trump told an audience of investors and company executives in Miami.
  3. ^ Picchi, Aimee (February 18, 2025). "Musk is not an employee of DOGE and "has no actual or formal authority," White House says". CBS News. Retrieved 2025-03-01. Like other senior White House advisers, Mr. Musk has no actual or formal authority to make government decisions himself.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Elon_Musk&oldid=1283279250"