Jump to content

Talk:Ronn Torossian: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
TheNYCdan (talk | contribs)
75 edits
No edit summary
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit
 
(786 intermediate revisions by 97 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{talkheader}}
{{Talk header}}
{{COI editnotice}}
{{WPBiography|living=yes|class=|priority=|listas=Torossian, Ronn}}
{{Old AfD multi |page1=Ronn Torossian |date1=2007 November 15 |result1='''Keep''' |page2=Ronn Torossian (2nd nomination) |date2=3 October 2008 |result2='''Keep''' |date3=9 March 2022 |result3='''Keep''' |page3=Ronn Torossian (3rd nomination)}}
{{oldafdfull|page=Ronn Torossian|date=2007 November 15|result='''keep'''}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|collapsed=yes|class=C|blp=yes|listas=Torossian, Ronn|
{{oldafdfull|page=Ronn Torossian (2nd nomination)|date=3 October 2008|result='''keep'''}}
{{WikiProject Biography}}
{{WikiProject Marketing & Advertising|importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject New York City|importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject New York (state)|importance=low|SUNY=yes|SUNY-importance=Low|category=}}
{{WikiProject Judaism|class=start|importance=low}}
{{WikiProject Jewish history|class=start|importance=low}}
}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{talk archive navigation}}
|maxarchivesize = 70K
|counter = 7
|minthreadsleft = 4
|minthreadstoarchive = 1
|algo = old(91d)
|archive = Talk:Ronn Torossian/Archive %(counter)d
}}
{{Merged-from|5W Public Relations|24 April 2014}}


=Discussion=
== Copyright permissions ==
@Revpapa Wow, I've never seen a talk page with this many archive pages! I wouldn't have edited the page in the first place if I'd seen that there was so much passion around it. But since I have stepped in, I'll share my observations. <br>
I have full permisison from 5W to use the text. I can also modify it somewhat, if that is what is needed.
[[User:Judae1|Juda S. Engelmayer]] 17:21, 15 December 2006 (UTC)


== Political Section==
Just sent the email with permission
Rather extreme political section added. Irrelevant to why he is now notable. And majorly oversized, outdated and with non notable sources. [[User:Therhehassasa|Therhehassasa]] ([[User talk:Therhehassasa|talk]]) 20:23, 18 March 2019 (UTC)


== Controversy section ==


Recommend creating a section on controversy. He stepped down from 5W PR last week due to it coming to light that he secretly purchased a PR-industry news site to highlight his clients' work as well as the company itself. Chances are that a lot of his page was also written by employees.
== wikifying ==
<ref>https://www.crainsnewyork.com/media/ronn-torossian-steps-down-ceo-5wpr</ref>
<ref>https://www.businessinsider.com/5ws-controversial-leader-ronn-torossian-steps-down-as-ceo-2022-3</ref>
<ref>https://www.crainsnewyork.com/media/ronn-torossian-5wpr-secretly-scrubs-industry-news-site-it-operated-tout-itself-bash-rivals</ref>
<ref>https://www.thedailybeast.com/5w-public-relations-ceo-ronn-torossian-steps-down-after-daily-beast-expose</ref>
<ref>https://www.prweek.com/article/1747390/prsa-new-york-condemns-5wpr-ceo-ronn-torossians-masked-ownership-everything-pr</ref>
[[Special:Contributions/71.127.193.90|71.127.193.90]] ([[User talk:71.127.193.90|talk]]) 16:45, 7 March 2022 (UTC)


We don't need to add a controversy section. We need to delete the article. There is nothing notable about this guy (what's his name again?) and never really was. [[User:Ravpapa|Ravpapa]] ([[User talk:Ravpapa|talk]]) 03:14, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
I've added some more information, wikified this, and categorized this; hopefully it reads a little less like a press release now. Article still needs to be fleshed out though. --[[User:DropDeadGorgias|DDG]] 20:18, 15 December 2006 (UTC)


:I agree. The person who created the page and made most of the initial edits has been banned for COI editing and was a senior person at the subject's company. Highly in favor of deleting the article, or at minimum, pairing it down to what is actually noteworthy – which would make this a much shorter article. [[Special:Contributions/71.127.193.90|71.127.193.90]] ([[User talk:71.127.193.90|talk]]) 13:44, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
::Okay. made the nomination. If you want to participate in the discussion, you should create a username for yourself. Anonymous users - especially in this case where the article has been invaded by sockpuppets - are not particularly welcome in deletion discussions. [[User:Ravpapa|Ravpapa]] ([[User talk:Ravpapa|talk]]) 05:33, 9 March 2022 (UTC)


::And if you do participate, be sure to note any possible conflicts of interest (for example, if you are or were an employee of 5WPR or were the subject of one of his smear campaigns). [[User:Ravpapa|Ravpapa]] ([[User talk:Ravpapa|talk]]) 12:45, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
== Neutrality ==
I am concerned this may fall short of [[Wikipedia:Neutral point of view|neutrality guidelines on Wikipedia]]:
:"Torossian is known for his aggressive, results focused orientation, and has close working relationships with members of the media, influencers, decision makers, politicians and celebrities.
--[[User:Edcolins|Edcolins]] 16:09, 11 February 2007 (UTC)


== Semi-protected edit request on 7 May 2024 ==
:Peacockery comes to mind, more than lack of neutrality. I deleted it, it was difficult to understand. [[User:KP Botany|KP Botany]] 05:16, 15 July 2007 (UTC)


{{edit semi-protected|Ronn Torossian|answered=yes}}
The article has been mainly written by [[User:Judae1|Judae1]], who is an employee of Torossian's firm. It should be cleared of material, which is there to "advertise" Torossian, and should include material from and like this [http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_46/b4058064.htm?chan=innovation_branding_top+stories businessweek article] to balance it. But, in my opinion, the NY Post article, discussed below, is inappropriate.--[[User:Atavi|Atavi]] 14:16, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
Addition to “Personal Life” segment or creation of a “Controversy” segment. On May 5, 2024, Torossian was arrested on the Syracuse University campus’ Shaw Quadrangle. It was alleged that Torossian was “especially aggressive in his verbal treatment of students” at the Gaza Solidarity Encampment. After being asked to deescalate, Syracuse University’s Department of Public Safety wrote that Torossian grabbed and tossed students’ food from a table.<ref>https://dailyorange.com/2024/05/ronn-torossian-confirmed-parent-arrested-quad/</ref> <ref>https://dailyorange.com/2024/05/parent-arrested-verbal-altercation-encampment-syracuse/</ref> [[User:Junecm|Junecm]] ([[User talk:Junecm|talk]]) 13:53, 7 May 2024 (UTC)


:[[File:Red information icon with gradient background.svg|20px|link=|alt=]] '''Not done for now:''' please establish a [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] for this alteration '''[[Wikipedia:Edit requests|before]]''' using the {{Tlx|Edit semi-protected}} template.<!-- Template:ESp --> Some users seems to be objecting to the addition of the section (See discussion above this request). [[User:AlphaBetaGamma|ABG]] <small> ([[User talk:AlphaBetaGamma|Talk/Report any mistakes here]]) </small> 12:38, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
:This article appears to be very straight forward and inline with external newssources and free of blog articles with a clear bias to them. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:207.237.137.37|207.237.137.37]] ([[User talk:207.237.137.37|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/207.237.137.37|contribs]]) 21:02, July 14, 2008</small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->

== New York Post Story ==

Torossian was written up in the New York Post for hijacking the domain sites of many PR firms in New York. [http://www.nypost.com/seven/09102006/gossip/pagesix/jokes_on_him_pagesix_.htm] But he forgot to protect his own name. This news item has been whitewashed and deleted from his article. We are requesting Wiki adms to keep an eye on Torossian authoring and editing his own page. Thanks. [[User:Zonenet|Zonenet]] 18:11, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

:This item may well be inappropriate for a wikipedia article. But I won't go into that, because I don't have the energy to argue about it. The main point is that together with that piece of "information", [[User:Zonenet|Zonenet]] had inserted defamatory claims about Torossian, which I won't reproduce.
:I should add that according to [[Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons]], under "Dealing with edits by the subject of the article", Torossian has every right to edit his own article in order to remove such defamatory information.
:--[[User:Atavi|Atavi]] 21:11, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

::[[Page 6]] stories are tabloid pieces and not appropriate for the tone of an encyclopedia. --[[User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )|Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )]] ([[User talk:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )|talk]]) 23:19, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

==BusinessWeek Story==
It should be noted that the author of the BusinessWeek story added a comment to her article after in reply where she clarified her intent of the piece, which was not to malign or criticize, but to give note to this guy for his goods and bads.

:"Nickname: Diane
:Review - Just a response to "Ronn" (who likely isn't the profile subject of this piece, as he didn't think I had an axe to grind). It was Ronn's success that prompted me to take a look at him and his firm. After talking to him about how he could balance having Pat Robertson's Regent University and Girls Gone Wild as clients (in my dealings, he personally speaks for both), I suggested doing a profile. He's certainly a provocative and colorful character but he's also had some real coups in getting publicity for his clients. Date reviewed: Nov 13, 2007 5:25 PM" [http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_46/b4058064.htm?chan=innovation_branding_top+stories][[User:RubenKlor|RubenKlor]] 02:39, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

== Rabbi impersonation controversy ==

There have been multiple unexplained deletion by IP accounts regarding 5W's astroturfing scheme. If the reliability of sources is an issue, here are a few links you can use instead of deleting the content completely:
*http://www.jewishberkshires.org/page.aspx?id=179351
*http://www.prweekus.com/UPDATE-5W-acknowledges-blog-misconduct/article/112308/
*http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1215330943658&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
*http://www.jta.org/cgi-bin/iowa/breaking/109424.html --[[User:Mosmof|Mosmof]] ([[User talk:Mosmof|talk]]) 03:04, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

:All of these are entries by an anti-religious biased source, himself. Charges ? Lawsuits ? arrests ? Anything here accurate at all ? Whatsoever ? And 9 lines to it for a CEO who made a comment on it ? HUH ? <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/207.237.137.37|207.237.137.37]] ([[User talk:207.237.137.37|talk]]) 03:36, 15 July 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

::This clear on-line bias is nothing more than failed messiah with nothing more than biased rants, self-righteous indignation, and one-sided research from routinely anonymous followers. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Emetman|Emetman]] ([[User talk:Emetman|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Emetman|contribs]]) 03:41, 15 July 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

The content about the fake Web entries is perfectly suited for a page about Mr. Torossian as it was his firm, his client and his comments in the media. The 6-7 lines on the matter were written in journalistic style and were appropriately cited with legitimiate sources. Yet, the content continues to be deleted???? Probably by the same person/people who wrote the article to begin with -- either Mr. Torossian himself or his staffers. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/161.185.150.82|161.185.150.82]] ([[User talk:161.185.150.82|talk]]) 13:36, 15 July 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:There is overwhelming reason to believe that both [[User:207.237.137.37|207.237.137.37]] and [[User:Emetman|Emetman]] are sockpuppets of Ronn Torossian himself, and that he has been the person repeatedly removing legitimate but critical content from this page and the page regarding his firm, [[5W Public Relations]]. The evidence includes the contribution pages for both [[Special:Contributions/207.237.137.37|207.237.137.37]] and [[Special:Contributions/Emetman|Emetman]], where almost all of the edits are on these two pages, the pages of 5W clients such as [[Joe Francis]], and [[List of Stuyvesant High School people]], Stuyvesant High School being Torossian's alma mater. There is also the fact that DNSstuff identifies the IP address 207.237.137.37 as being in New York, New York, Torossian's and 5W's home city. The above two comments by 207.237.137.37 and Emetman sound suspiciously like Torossian's comments to the [[Jewish Telegraphic Agency]], where he justifies 5W's sockpuppeting/astroturfing in the Jewish blogosphere by claiming the rabbi impersonation scheme is not about blogging, rather, all means are justified to protect kashrut. Given this repeated history of sockpuppeting, vandalism, conflict of interest, and corporate self-promotion, all in flagrant violation of Wikipedia policy, there is ample reason to block both users and to watch out for future sockpuppets of Mr. Torossian and 5W trying to misuse Wikipedia as a PR tool. --[[Special:Contributions/76.230.156.206|76.230.156.206]] ([[User talk:76.230.156.206|talk]]) 08:45, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
::Mosmof, surely in your battle for ethics and honesty you are willing to identify yourself? Would anyone doubt you are in fact Rosenberg of Failedmessiah ? Your absurd claims of federal laws and lawsuits are in fact ample cause for question. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/207.237.137.37|207.237.137.37]] ([[User talk:207.237.137.37|talk]]) 11:35, 16 July 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:::I'm not sure where you got the idea that this was about "ethics and honesty". This is a simple content dispute with [[WP:COI]] mixed in. So a lot of things to parse here:
:::#I've actually removed mention of the rabbi impersonation from here and moved it to the 5W page, since none of the media reports connect Ronn with the incident directly - as far as reliable sources can tell, it was an indiscretion by the firm, not Ronn. So we can move the discussion to the talk page there: [[Talk:5W Public Relations]].
:::#No, I'm not willing to identify myself, and attempting to out me is against Wiki policy (well, except when there's clear evidence of COI, of course). All I can say is that I have an extensive edit history where Agriprocessor- or Torossian-related topics constitute a tiny, tiny percentage. So it's highly unlikely that I am Rosenberg, unless of course, Mr. Rosenberg sneaked onto my computer during a get-together at my apartment.
:::#You've mentioned this "federal laws" and "lawsuits" before, and I'm not sure where you're getting it. It may have been in the older edits you kept deleting, but in the rewrite that I did, I don't mention any legal action, pending, threatened, or otherwise.
:::#Anyway, the information in the [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=5W_Public_Relations&diff=225829246&oldid=225821495 rewrite] comes entirely from independent, non-primary sources. So unless you're willing to question the credibility of JTA or the Forward or PR Week, I'm not sure how much you can question the content. You're more than free to do so at [[Talk:5W Public Relations]], obviously. --[[User:Mosmof|Mosmof]] ([[User talk:Mosmof|talk]]) 15:22, 16 July 2008 (UTC)


==category==

he is the leader of a (far right) jewish organization and is quoted to call himself to be a "jewish bad boy" (http://www.forward.com/articles/publicist-scores-with-rappers-right-wing-politici/). so, how can he be an armenian (-american)? --[[User:Severino|Severino]] ([[User talk:Severino|talk]]) 15:12, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

==Client listing==
Fail to understand how Christian right is relevant but corporate isnt ? <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/207.237.137.37|207.237.137.37]] ([[User talk:207.237.137.37|talk]]) 01:44, 27 July 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Oh yes...good point, but just a listing of companies doesn't help differentiate subject from his company. I think the sources are there, but which clients can be traced directly to their relationship with Torossian? [[User:Flowanda|Flowanda]] | [[User talk:Flowanda|Talk]] 02:34, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
Well then explain why Christian right clients are relevant ? If you remove the corporate clients again, I plan to report you and ban accordingly from maligning this persons page. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/207.237.137.37|207.237.137.37]] ([[User talk:207.237.137.37|talk]]) 09:14, 28 July 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:I suppose Christian Right clients are relevant, because of his involvement with Zionist causes, juxtapositions and all. But note that we're talking about the "Early life" section here. I'll just take out the references to 5W clients completely, and leave a link to the 5W article. --[[User:Mosmof|Mosmof]] ([[User talk:Mosmof|talk]]) 13:46, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
::The intro boldly describes him as a publicity guru and scrappy NY publicist, then the rest of the article backs into the reasons why all for a number of internal reasons -- COI edits, reactions to COI edits, deletion review edits, reaction to deletion edits, etc. etc. But whatever, we're left with an article full of random facts with no real connection to each other or the intro, and in this case, no real clear definition between the person and the company he heads.
::I'm not going to mess with the fact that there are two articles, but I do think there needs to be distinct differences in the content here as opposed to whatever companies he heads. To me, this article could include the current intro and concise section/s that show/s how his early life shaped his career and how he used those clients/publicity to form a new company...and how he (as opposed to his company) is directly related to clients/developments/strategies/issues/controversies/etc. [[User:Flowanda|Flowanda]] | [[User talk:Flowanda|Talk]] 16:12, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
:::Part of the problem, I think, is that there actually is relatively little of substance about him out there that wouldn't be more relevant in the 5WPR article. Though I do think we can flesh out the article using sources we already have - the bit from the NY Times article re: "a self-promoting publicist", and the Forward article goes into detail about his activism and transition to PR. --[[User:Mosmof|Mosmof]] ([[User talk:Mosmof|talk]]) 22:55, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
:So, maybe the sentence could be something like... "After forming 5W in 2003, Torossian continued to represent clients from the Christian right, but also began picking up corporate clients and celebrities." ...and just leave it at that? The internal links to the company then should be enough. Note: I wrote the sentence to suggest structure only, so the example may not be accurate. [[User:Flowanda|Flowanda]] | [[User talk:Flowanda|Talk]] 15:12, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Client list should be as up to date as possible.
([[Special:Contributions/12.103.203.218|12.103.203.218]] ([[User talk:12.103.203.218|talk]]) 15:07, 14 February 2009 (UTC)).
:Categorically false. There is nothing at all wrong with indicating whom Torossian has represented in the past. If you want to add new ones -- with proper/working references -- fine. But it is not the function of Wikipedia to portray something only as it is in the present. [[User:Nomoskedasticity|Nomoskedasticity]] ([[User talk:Nomoskedasticity|talk]]) 15:12, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

==COI Tag==
There is little point leaving the COI tag on right now. The article is simple and says basics. As long as people stop writing and fighting over this, that tag is no longer needed. Let's just watch and see if people can stay away.
[[Special:Contributions/38.119.107.107|38.119.107.107]] ([[User talk:38.119.107.107|talk]]) 17:10, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

== BusinessWeek profile ==

Looks like this BusinessWeek article got lost in the clean-up of the article, but it's probably worth going back to so we can flesh out the article: http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_46/b4058064.htm --[[User:Mosmof|Mosmof]] ([[User talk:Mosmof|talk]]) 16:02, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
==Dispute Tag==
I place the dispute tag on the article. It seems that the common editing practice here is to place merely every negative comment that is made on this site. Sure Jeffrey Goldberg may say that Torossian said what he did, but Torossian disputes it. The interview that Goldberg quotes happened several years ago and he never wrote it before. Second, if you go to [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5tnJ53yrCwc Youtube] and listen to democratic strategist [http://www.sheinkopf.com/hank.html Hank Sheinkopf], he says plainly that he respects Torossian and the work of his firm. That is fair game for mention just as well. [http://www.gaon.com/?catid={DB17FA02-609D-4EDA-8705-F618135101B6} Moshe Gaon], and Israeli billionaire, says the same [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4V4jGSXgXTU here], yet what we see here are articles that only talk bad. I think that a Wiki site ought to be fair or at least write why it cannot be rather than merely place everyone's negative comments within the piece.

Ronn Torossian has undoubtedly attracted some detractors for the way he built his firm, but he built it with clients who pay him and trust him to do the work. Evidently, there are people who enjoy his work and methods or there will be little to nothing to generate the bad publicity.

Balance please. [[User:TLVEWR|TLVEWR]] ([[User talk:TLVEWR|talk]]) 14:57, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
:Even if Goldberg's account of Torossian's statements may be in dispute, him calling Torossian "the most disreputable flack in New York" is not, and as a notable journalist, his opinion is relevant. And I'm not sure why you have a problem with balance - there's plenty of positives about Torossian. [[User:Mosmof|Mosmof]] ([[User talk:Mosmof|talk]]) 16:34, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
:Agree with Mosmof (on this point, anyway): I don't see how that final paragraph contains anything that is unsourced or poorly sourced (which is what that template claims). My only concern would be that it's not clear to me how Goldberg's critique of Torrosian's views on the Arab-Israeli conflict is relevant to a section on Torrosian's PR career. Since Torrosian is not (to my knowledge) a notable person with respect to that conflict, I'm not sure we need Goldman's critique of his views on it. [[User:Nomoskedasticity|Nomoskedasticity]] ([[User talk:Nomoskedasticity|talk]]) 16:57, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
::And I agree with [[user:Nomoskedasticity|Nomoskedasticity]]. This guy is a blogger first of all, and second, why is it in there at all? The fact that whenever some editor writes in a new negative comment, the cadre of editors to RT's wiki article sing the same tune - it belongs. There is no objective thought in that. Considering that Lloyd Grove's comment was deleted - although it was in the same Times article, is bizarre. Let's just stop this nonsense to these articles already. The same group of pros and cons always. [[User:TLVEWR|TLVEWR]] ([[User talk:TLVEWR|talk]])
:::Fair enough - that criticism is out of place in the PR section. I'll edit it out if no one else has. --[[User:Mosmof|Mosmof]] ([[User talk:Mosmof|talk]]) 17:12, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
:::TLVEWR - the Lloyd Grove comment was not deleted. It was placed after the other praise, as it didn't make sense to have it right after the sentence about him losing an account. Please pay closer attention before reverting an edit, and remember to [[WP:AGF|assume good faith]]. Instead of questioning another editor's intentions, explain why an edit fails one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines. [[User:Mosmof|Mosmof]] ([[User talk:Mosmof|talk]]) 17:20, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
--: If Jeff Goldberg's attribution to Ronn Torossian is in dispute - which it is, and his subsequent comment about being "the most disreputable..." was clearly garnered from that, how is it relevant merely because Jeff said it? on Wikipedia's own guideline pages for responsible editing of living people, it requires a bit more care. It is easy to throw gratuitous comments from O'Dwyers, [[Benny Elon]], [[Roger Stone]], [[Ehud Olmert]], [[Yoel Hasson]], Hank Sheninkopf, and dozens of others who have said positive things about the style and methods here, but it is not the place for those - as it is not the place for every journalists opinion; particularly when that opinion is rendered from comments that may not have been said - or said not quite as the writer relayed them. I am trying to stay off the editing pages for this, but would it be fair to ask for fairness?
[[User:Judae1|Juda S. Engelmayer]] ([[User talk:Judae1|talk]]) 17:38, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
:As I read the article, the "disreputable" comment was independent of RT's views on Israel - Goldberg offered it as background to the comments. As for balance, I've fleshed out the PR career section with both positives and negatives, and Goldberg is not just a blogger or "every journalist" - he's written for the New Yorker and Atlantic, and certainly notable enough to have his own Wiki article. I appreciate your weighing in here, but no matter what I do, by providing both sides of the debate, I can't seem to win with you. [[User:Mosmof|Mosmof]] ([[User talk:Mosmof|talk]]) 17:54, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
Also - the Businessweek comment "Another rival points out that trash-talking the competition can build buzz but eventually could backfire. "These tactics are great for your first $5 million," says this person. "It starts to hurt you during the second $5 million."" is unattributed. Why is this in here?

It is not about winning or losing - it is about fairness. I work here, I see the press and read; but what is the constant editing to put these articles in a skewed light? It is like there are people out there who seem to have an opinion and feel the need to continuously voice it through editing here. [[User:Judae1|Juda S. Engelmayer]] ([[User talk:Judae1|talk]]) 17:59, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
:Minor point, but I think you misunderstood me re: "winning". I'm not trying to "win" an argument or force a certain edit into the article. I just meant that no matter what I do, you or someone else from your company complains about balance. As for the unattributed quote, it's unattributed because it was unattributed in the cited source. I see your point, and you're welcome to take it out. --[[User:Mosmof|Mosmof]] ([[User talk:Mosmof|talk]]) 18:35, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
::Thanks - as far as being welcome to take it out - I am not so sure that all agree that I am welcome to do anything to these articles... :( [[User:Judae1|Juda S. Engelmayer]] ([[User talk:Judae1|talk]]) 19:21, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

How can 40 under 40 be used as a negative ? Have never heard of such a thing ? And Goldberg no matter how major he may be wrote this on a blog. cannot be used as a reference. Was a blog. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/12.103.203.218|12.103.203.218]] ([[User talk:12.103.203.218|talk]]) 13:43, 4 November 2008 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:As mentioned below, there's no "Though shalt not cite a blog" commandment in Wikipedia - one should simply avoid self-published sources. Goldberg expressed the opinion on a medium provided by the Atlantic Monthly. As for your first point, I have no idea who gave you the idea that only positive quotes can be culled from positive articles. Please cite relevant guideline. And his desire for self-promotion is one of the major reasons for his fame, and therefore his notability. We would be remiss not to mention it in the intro. And it's not entirely a negative - it's in overall positive context, and Torossian himself doesn't deny the self-promoter label, and he obviously works hard at it. --[[User:Mosmof|Mosmof]] ([[User talk:Mosmof|talk]]) 14:31, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
:On the use of Goldberg for "disreputable flack": if this reference were being used to support "Torossian is the most disreputable flack in NYC..." then we'd have a problem. But as a reference for "Goldberg '''called him''' 'the most disreputable flack in NYC'", the reference is merely establishing that Goldberg holds this opinion. So what is at stake here is not whether the source is adequate. [[User:Nomoskedasticity|Nomoskedasticity]] ([[User talk:Nomoskedasticity|talk]]) 14:42, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
:::thesource is adequate, but it would be better to use it for something more useful than nonspecifc negative comments. '''[[User:DGG|DGG]]''' ([[User talk:DGG|talk]]) 12:51, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

==[[WP:BLP]]==
Basic human dignity

[[Wikipedia:BLP#Basic_human_dignity|Wikipedia articles should respect the basic human dignity of their subjects. Wikipedia aims to be a reputable encyclopedia, not a tabloid. Our articles must not serve primarily to mock or disparage their subjects, whether directly or indirectly. This is of particularly profound importance when dealing with individuals whose notability stems largely from their being victims of another's actions. Wikipedia editors must not act, intentionally or otherwise, in a way that amounts to participating in or prolonging the victimization.]]

AND

Criticism and praise

[[Wikipedia:BLP#Criticism_and_praise|Criticism and praise of the subject should be represented if it is relevant to the subject's notability and can be sourced to reliable secondary sources, and so long as the material is written in a manner that does not overwhelm the article or appear to take sides; it needs to be presented responsibly, conservatively, and in a neutral, encyclopedic tone. Be careful not to give a disproportionate amount of space to particular viewpoints, to avoid the effect of representing a minority view as if it were the majority one. The views of a tiny minority have no place in the article. Care must be taken with article structure to ensure the overall presentation is broadly neutral; in particular, subsection headings should reflect important areas to the subject's notability.]]

Content should be sourced to reliable sources and should be about the subject of the article specifically. Beware of claims that rely on guilt by association. Be on the lookout for biased or malicious content about living persons. If someone appears to be promoting a biased point of view, insist on reliable third-party published sources and a clear demonstration of relevance to the person's notability.

This article should be kept to standards. With respect to commentators here, Jeffrey Goldberg used to write for New Yorker, now he writes a BLOG. A blog is a non reliable source and must not be used as a reference. The reference here is also used to merely lopside this article with attacks or "factual" bad things about Torrosian. This is not what Wiki is for, but what the commujity seems to believe it is about. Wiki is not intended to beat people you do not like or people whose ideas or ideals are disagreed with. I am going to challenge this on [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Ronn_Torossian Wiki's administrative pages].
[[User:Handle in the Wind|Handle in the Wind]] ([[User talk:Handle in the Wind|talk]]) 04:05, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
==[[Jeffrey Goldberg]]==
This man writes a blog now. He can be seen as an expert in Israel; Why is his OPINION on PR professionals relevant to a wikipedia article? They should not be. [[User:TLVEWR|TLVEWR]] ([[User talk:TLVEWR|talk]]) 14:01, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
:It should be pointed out that there's no hard and fast rule against citing bloggers or using blogs to cite an author's opinion. It's part of a more general guideline against using self-published sources, which most blogs are, but Goldberg's site isn't - it's published by the Atlantic Monthly. And it's not like a person loses his notability or authority when he starts a blog - is [[Paul Krugman]]'s opinion less valid when expressed on his NY Times blog rather than his biweekly op-ed column? As for Goldberg's opinion on PR, I think we can agree that Torossian is not a typical PR - he's very much visible in the public sphere. --[[User:Mosmof|Mosmof]] ([[User talk:Mosmof|talk]]) 14:25, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Mosmof if you use Page 6 as a source here, please state publicly you will accept other Page 6 on Torossian. If Goldberg blog is acceptable, why wasnt Perez Hilton and E Entertainment for 5W Public Relations Sundance ? [[User: <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/12.103.203.218|12.103.203.218]] ([[User talk:12.103.203.218|talk]]) 21:39, 9 November 2008 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:First, please don't conflate referencing a gossip column with citing it. Second, Goldberg is writing under Atlantic Monthly's editorial control, and citing his blog (which, again, is not a self-published source) is perfectly acceptable as a source for Goldberg's own opinion, as opposed to statements of fact.
:Anyway, I wish you'd stop bringing up "OMG, he's a blogger!!!" like it makes a difference. There's no hard and fast rule on using blogs as source. It's just a publishing platform. However, blogs ''do'' present a problem as [[WP:RS]] when (a) the author has no other claim to notability, and (b) the blog is self-published and is under no editorial oversight. Most bloggers fail these two tests, Goldberg does not. [[User:Mosmof|Mosmof]] ([[User talk:Mosmof|talk]]) 21:51, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

So lets talk specifics, why did you personally remove E Entertainment from 5W page as a blog and Rinat Akhmetov's page as well and link to 5W ? You cited both as blogs and not wiki standards. Why ? [[User: <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/12.103.203.218|12.103.203.218]] ([[User talk:12.103.203.218|talk]]) 22:48, 9 November 2008 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Why don't you bring it up in [[Talk: 5W Public Relations]]? I don't remember the exact edits or the reasoning for the edits. Specific diffs would help. [[User:Mosmof|Mosmof]] ([[User talk:Mosmof|talk]]) 22:54, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Even though Goldberg has a journalistic background, the material mosmof is trying to incorporate onto this page originated from a blog. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Joebobby|Joebobby]] ([[User talk:Joebobby|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Joebobby|contribs]]) 02:42, 12 November 2008 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Not sure why it matters that his opinion was published in a blog format. Please weigh in at [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Ronn Torossian/5W Public Relations]]. [[User:Mosmof|Mosmof]] ([[User talk:Mosmof|talk]]) 02:54, 12 November 2008 (UTC)


==Ben Brafman edit==
I propose to remove the Ben Brafman info, as clearly the relationship has changed greatly over the past 4 years, given the following Youtube tape, hosted at 5WPR office: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5KHmMNZoRM
[[Special:Contributions/12.103.203.218|12.103.203.218]] ([[User talk:12.103.203.218|talk]]) 23:22, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
:Nothing that's happened in the past 4 years has changed the actual fact that Brafman dropped 5W as its PR agency. --[[User:Mosmof|Mosmof]] ([[User talk:Mosmof|talk]]) 14:22, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Brafman clearly hasnt severed all ties as you imply. 4 years ago isnt today. Let bygones be bygones, or at least be factually accurate,. ([[Special:Contributions/12.103.203.218|12.103.203.218]] ([[User talk:12.103.203.218|talk]]) 13:05, 14 February 2009 (UTC)).
:There's nothing to suggest that Brafman ''didn't'' sever business ties (which I think the current edit implies), but later reconciled or resumed the relationship or maintained a personal relationship. But the gist of that statement is that Ronn's notoriety ''did'' have some effect, short term or otherwise, on his business relationships. Anyway, the edit is sourced to a NY Times article (which is overall complimentary), and he's directly quoted in this PR Week piece: http://www.prweekus.com/Famous-Publicists-Self-promoting-publicists-and-clients-who-love-them/article/51839/ , so the factual accuracy is not in question, and we don't really let bygones be bygones - we have articles about things that happened 20, 50, even 200 years ago. --[[User:Mosmof|Mosmof]] ([[User talk:Mosmof|talk]]) 14:44, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

so keep it then... but it must be factually accurate. He speaks highly of Torossian, which directly contradicts your statement.([[Special:Contributions/12.103.203.218|12.103.203.218]] ([[User talk:12.103.203.218|talk]]) 15:01, 14 February 2009 (UTC)).

== April 2010 Edits ==
Its absurd as of 4/2010 to talk about something which occured in July 2008 on his personal page for a former employee and discuss lawsuits and charges. Nothing has happened since then. Will it now occur ? Leave well enough alone. His firm also was just named one of the largest in the US yet that isnt indicated. Not timely nor relevant. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/68.173.122.113|68.173.122.113]] ([[User talk:68.173.122.113|talk]]) 01:32, 3 April 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

In section below regarding "Rabbi", Mosmof himself states:
"I've actually removed mention of the rabbi impersonation from here and moved it to the 5W page, since none of the media reports connect Ronn with the incident directly - as far as reliable sources can tell, it was an indiscretion by the firm, not Ronn."
Therefore, what justification may he have for now saying it belongs here ? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/68.173.122.113|68.173.122.113]] ([[User talk:68.173.122.113|talk]]) 02:05, 3 April 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:Uh, you realize this is Wikipedia, [[WP:NOTNEWS|not]] Wikinews? That said, yeah, I agree with myself, I was right and I'm wrong. But if we can't discuss stuff that happened in 2008 or earlier, then we should probably start an AFD for [[Byzantine Empire]], huh? --[[User:Mosmof|Mosmof]] ([[User talk:Mosmof|talk]]) 02:48, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

A negative mention in 2005 is relevant but positive in 2009 isnt ? Inaccurate ? Also, Joe Francis is more important than Coca-Cola or Mcdonalds ? (Biz Week is the source) <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/68.173.122.113|68.173.122.113]] ([[User talk:68.173.122.113|talk]]) 00:48, 4 April 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

Mosmof fails to identify why it shouldnt be relevant that the firm was named one of largest in US. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/68.173.122.113|68.173.122.113]] ([[User talk:68.173.122.113|talk]]) 19:58, 4 April 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:I explained it already. It's because the article is about Ronn Torossian and there's a convenient link for people who want to learn about the awesomeness that is 5W PR? --[[User:Mosmof|Mosmof]] ([[User talk:Mosmof|talk]]) 20:03, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Then explain why Girls Gone Wild would be there ? Thats Torossian or 5W ? He's relevant because of his company ? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/68.173.122.113|68.173.122.113]] ([[User talk:68.173.122.113|talk]]) 20:09, 4 April 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

Mosmof claims that the guys' company was named 1 of largest in US is less relevant than an attorney firing the firm. Wouldnt be 1 of the largest PR agencies in US be more important than a lawyer firing the company ? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/68.173.122.113|68.173.122.113]] ([[User talk:68.173.122.113|talk]]) 20:13, 4 April 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

I have asked Mosmof repeatedly to not re-introduce fights which have been had ad naseum and he continually ignores agreements. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/68.173.122.113|68.173.122.113]] ([[User talk:68.173.122.113|talk]]) 23:36, 4 April 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:And I ask that you stop mischaracterizing my edits and interactions with you. I have engaged you in discussion plenty of times and even attempted to compromise with you here. Yet you continue to not [[WP:AGF|assume good faith]] and [[WP:CANVASS|forum shop and canvass]] for editors to help push your POV. It's pretty tiresome.
:Anyway, back to the edit. Look, I was happy to use a more general language to describe Ronn T's clientele, but you freaked out over it, so it stayed. Here's the thing - the primary reason for his notoriety and [[WP:N|notability]] isn't so much where his firm ranks in the industry, but his style and diversity of client base. Considering that, where an industry sheet ranked 5W is of less note to an outsider than the individual clients he has had on roster. --[[User:Mosmof|Mosmof]] ([[User talk:Mosmof|talk]]) 01:22, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Since when is the fact that his company is 1 of 15 largest in US more relevant than the clients he represents ? Why would that be the case ? You continue to push your editorial agenda. No freaking out simply you seem to be a bully online. The [[WP:CANVASS|forum shop and canvass]] asked for you to stay away from this page but you didnt. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Babasalichai|Babasalichai]] ([[User talk:Babasalichai|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Babasalichai|contribs]]) 09:15, 6 April 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Goodness, you don't even read the link you posted, did you? I'm pretty sure I wasn't told to stay away. Anyway, I don't think "relevant" is the right word, but rather "notable" (at least as defined by Wikipedia). Most people could give a flying funk about the size of a dude's company. But if the dude's company does something that sets itself apart from other companies in the category (i.e., "He promotes Fortune 500 companies AND celebrities AND politicians!), then it's something impartial people would care about, and thus notable. [[User:Mosmof|Mosmof]] ([[User talk:Mosmof|talk]]) 10:29, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

The size and growth of the company is surely important or he wouldnt be relevant. And what Fortune 500 companies have you named ? I am not the one who has continually made mistakes here, you have ? <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Babasalichai|Babasalichai]] ([[User talk:Babasalichai|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Babasalichai|contribs]]) 10:40, 6 April 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== February 2011 Edits==
Editor attempt to make changes after all the discussions arent reasonable. [[User:Jonathanglick13|Jonathanglick13]] ([[User talk:Jonathanglick13|talk]]) 03:23, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
: What was wrong with it? It seemed to clean up the [[WP:LEDE|lead]] significantly. [[User:Dayewalker|Dayewalker]] ([[User talk:Dayewalker|talk]]) 03:26, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
::Agreed. The lead was absurd. Way too much going on there and all of it was unnecessary. It wasn't a neutral account. According to Wiki, "The lead should contain no more than four paragraphs, must be carefully sourced as appropriate, and should be written in a clear, accessible style ''with a neutral point of view'' to invite a reading of the full article." There was no neutrality there, so it should be removed. --[[User:Shotgunsonthewhip|Shotgunsonthewhip]] ([[User talk:Shotgunsonthewhip|talk]]) 06:20, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

This has been debated ad naseum by multiple users you can review for many years. Was moved from lead and sourced to actual article. [[User:Jonathanglick13|Jonathanglick13]] ([[User talk:Jonathanglick13|talk]]) 11:48, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Cleanup done and moved from the lead. New user shotgunsonthewhip review here 1st. [[User:Babasalichai|Babasalichai]] ([[User talk:Babasalichai|talk]]) 11:56, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
:I think it's weird in the article since it's not really neutral, but as long as it's out of the lead right now -- that's fine :) --[[User:Shotgunsonthewhip|Shotgunsonthewhip]] ([[User talk:Shotgunsonthewhip|talk]]) 12:28, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

== February 2011 Edits==
In fact the entire paragraph doesnt make sense and after rereading earlier commentary regarding Goldberg it seems that earlier all debates agreed it didnt fit as Torossian isnt relevant for Israel politics and its not representative of his PR career. [[User:Jonathanglick13|Jonathanglick13]] ([[User talk:Jonathanglick13|talk]]) 12:08, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

All of these changes are from sourced media. Goldberg commentary on Israel has no relevance to his Israel career (as agreed above but seemingly never changed). [[User:Babasalichai|Babasalichai]] ([[User talk:Babasalichai|talk]]) 02:24, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

== March 2011 Edits ==
For some reason a user [[Gawker]] is used as a solid source.

The changes:
Torossian began his PR career as an aggressive practitioner and built his company on that “brash style” <ref name="NYT profile"/>. He was called by the New York Times "brash and aggressively outspoken... the consummate scrappy publicist"<ref name="NYT profile"/>. His aggressive style has helped garner clients, but also would pit him against fellow public relations firm executives and owners. "[w]ith Torossian threatening to go to "war" over his complaint that Rubenstein is trying to recruit from his employees. Rubenstein responds by threatening to sue, adding, "I hope you have a qualified attorney and it will be expensive."," as Sheldon Rampton, a columnist in for the [[Center for Media and Democracy]], a watchdog group that reports on marketing and PR activities.<ref>Sheldon Rampton, [http://www.prwatch.org/spin/2007/07/6257/when-publicists-attack "When Publicists Attack"], '' The Center for Media and Democracy’s PR Watch '', July 13, 2007</ref>

works better and is more balanced. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Abigail7|Abigail7]] ([[User talk:Abigail7|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Abigail7|contribs]]) 16:28, 30 March 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Do we need to protect this page? ==

They just keep coming and coming. There seems to be no end to this. --[[User:Ravpapa|Ravpapa]] ([[User talk:Ravpapa|talk]]) 16:50, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
: Heh. I just filed a report at [[WP:RFPP]] before seeing your post. Yes, I believe it's time. These SPAs are disruptive enough that we're not able to actually take a look at what really does need improving in the article, for having to ward off them adding 3K of promotional material. A nice round of protection would force the discussion back here to the talk page. [[User:Dayewalker|Dayewalker]] ([[User talk:Dayewalker|talk]]) 16:57, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

:: I think protecting the page is sound; but why lock it out using the revision stating that a writer for a gossip blog questions the subject's intelligence?
If you were trying to be honest and fair, you might revert this page back to the way it was prior to the editing attacks in February and leave the rest to debate? Nothing new has been added, and the information is all two years or more old. I am sure there are recent issues that can speak for this subject and not more of the same old that survived critique years ago.
Thank you
[[User:Abigail7|Abigail7]] ([[User talk:Abigail7|talk]]) 17:19, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

:::Dayewalker, are you also dealing with Abigail's 3RR violation? Or should we consider it moot once the page is protected? --[[User:Ravpapa|Ravpapa]] ([[User talk:Ravpapa|talk]]) 18:01, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
:::: I'm not going to be around this afternoon, but she should be warned against 3RR. She's edit warred her way into getting her preferred version. [[User:Dayewalker|Dayewalker]] ([[User talk:Dayewalker|talk]]) 18:52, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
::::: User warned: [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AAbigail7&action=historysubmit&diff=421526263&oldid=421510327] [[User:The Interior|<font color="brown">The</font><font color="green"> Interior</font>]] [[User Talk:The Interior|(Talk)]] 19:00, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

==Reliable sources==
Ravpapa, negative remarks in BLPs should have impeccable sources, and not be sourced to blogs or gossip rags. Could you please consider removing the material sourced to the Gawker? Thanks. --[[User:Diannaa|<span style="color:teal;">Diannaa</span>]] <sup>([[User talk:Diannaa|Talk]])</sup> 21:02, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
:Agree. The Nolan piece reads as an editorial opinion, and makes broad characterizations. It doesn't feel like an objective appraisal to me, and Gawker's reputation as a "tabloid" (be it a tabloid particularly well-informed about the P.R. industry) makes it very problematic. A quick search on the reliable sources noticeboard shows there is little community support for it as a RS. The quote, especially the " not particularly bright" bit, really sticks out as undue negative weight. [[User:The Interior|<font color="brown">The</font><font color="green"> Interior</font>]] [[User Talk:The Interior|(Talk)]] 21:09, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

::Also agree. Demiurge's edit solves the problem for the time being, but I will find another quote from a more reputable source later today. --[[User:Ravpapa|Ravpapa]] ([[User talk:Ravpapa|talk]]) 04:27, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

:Agree as well.. The entire reference to Gawker is contentious and being a BLP, the entire reference should be removed with out discussion. [[User:TheNYCdan|TheNYCdan]] ([[User talk:TheNYCdan|talk]]) 11:24, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 12:38, 29 May 2024

Discussion

[edit]

@Revpapa Wow, I've never seen a talk page with this many archive pages! I wouldn't have edited the page in the first place if I'd seen that there was so much passion around it. But since I have stepped in, I'll share my observations.

Political Section

[edit]

Rather extreme political section added. Irrelevant to why he is now notable. And majorly oversized, outdated and with non notable sources. Therhehassasa (talk) 20:23, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Controversy section

[edit]

Recommend creating a section on controversy. He stepped down from 5W PR last week due to it coming to light that he secretly purchased a PR-industry news site to highlight his clients' work as well as the company itself. Chances are that a lot of his page was also written by employees. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] 71.127.193.90 (talk) 16:45, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We don't need to add a controversy section. We need to delete the article. There is nothing notable about this guy (what's his name again?) and never really was. Ravpapa (talk) 03:14, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. The person who created the page and made most of the initial edits has been banned for COI editing and was a senior person at the subject's company. Highly in favor of deleting the article, or at minimum, pairing it down to what is actually noteworthy – which would make this a much shorter article. 71.127.193.90 (talk) 13:44, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. made the nomination. If you want to participate in the discussion, you should create a username for yourself. Anonymous users - especially in this case where the article has been invaded by sockpuppets - are not particularly welcome in deletion discussions. Ravpapa (talk) 05:33, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And if you do participate, be sure to note any possible conflicts of interest (for example, if you are or were an employee of 5WPR or were the subject of one of his smear campaigns). Ravpapa (talk) 12:45, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 7 May 2024

[edit]

Addition to “Personal Life” segment or creation of a “Controversy” segment. On May 5, 2024, Torossian was arrested on the Syracuse University campus’ Shaw Quadrangle. It was alleged that Torossian was “especially aggressive in his verbal treatment of students” at the Gaza Solidarity Encampment. After being asked to deescalate, Syracuse University’s Department of Public Safety wrote that Torossian grabbed and tossed students’ food from a table.[6] [7] Junecm (talk) 13:53, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template. Some users seems to be objecting to the addition of the section (See discussion above this request). ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 12:38, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ https://www.crainsnewyork.com/media/ronn-torossian-steps-down-ceo-5wpr
  2. ^ https://www.businessinsider.com/5ws-controversial-leader-ronn-torossian-steps-down-as-ceo-2022-3
  3. ^ https://www.crainsnewyork.com/media/ronn-torossian-5wpr-secretly-scrubs-industry-news-site-it-operated-tout-itself-bash-rivals
  4. ^ https://www.thedailybeast.com/5w-public-relations-ceo-ronn-torossian-steps-down-after-daily-beast-expose
  5. ^ https://www.prweek.com/article/1747390/prsa-new-york-condemns-5wpr-ceo-ronn-torossians-masked-ownership-everything-pr
  6. ^ https://dailyorange.com/2024/05/ronn-torossian-confirmed-parent-arrested-quad/
  7. ^ https://dailyorange.com/2024/05/parent-arrested-verbal-altercation-encampment-syracuse/
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ronn_Torossian&oldid=1226245111"