Talk:Mike Lindell

Why Mike Lindell Can’t Stop

• Why Mike Lindell Can’t Stop --Politico

--Guy Macon (talk) 21:40, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

On expanding the lead

The lead correctly describes Mr. Lindell as the founder and CEO of My Pillow in the first sentence. However, the rest—and most—of the lead is about his political activities, especially during tge 2020s. While Mr. Lindell might be receiving media attention for those activities, I am sure it would help to know what he was notable for beforehand, and this is especially helpful once his activities die down. I would propose changing and expanding the lead to look something like:

Michael James Lindell (born June 28, 1961),[4] also known as the My Pillow Guy,[5] is an American businessman and entrepreneur. Born and raised in Minnesota, he ran a number of small businesses before launching My Pillow, a pillow manufacturing company of which he remains the CEO.[6][3][7][8]
Lindell is a prominent supporter of, and advisor to, former U.S. President Donald Trump. He has, without evidence, promoted the toxic plant extract oleandrin as a COVID-19 cure and supported attempts to overturn the 2020 United States presidential election.[9] His other activities include philanthropy and support for faith-based recovery from drug addictions.

I think this would make the article less biased towards recentism, as this guy is more notable for his long history of entrepreneurship and only recently for his political activities. Before I make the edit, I would like to read any objections if there are any. FreeMediaKid$ 19:49, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Would you be expanding the article body or adding any new citations along with this edit? As it stands, the current lead seems a better representation of what he is notable for, which is MyPillow, his support of Trump, and his promotion of conspiracy theories. The article body currently has a single sentence mentioning his pre-MyPillow businesses, and three sentences about his philanthropy and support for faith-based recovery programs, so I think adding these to the lead without substantially more coverage would be undue. I don't think it's a recentism issue, he just wasn't notable pre-MyPillow. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 19:53, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Having looked at Mr. Lindell's activities based on Google search and news sources, it no longer seems to me that philanthropy is an important part of his career. I did find his consistent pattern of entrepreneurship, his rising only in prominence with his My Pillow company, and later undertaking ambitions like launching Frank, even if those ambitions never materialize, so I thought that maybe modifying the first sentence would work. I am thinking of Michael James Lindell (born June 28, 1961),[4] also known as the My Pillow Guy,[5] is an American businessman and entrepreneur who is the founder and CEO of My Pillow, Inc., a pillow manufacturing company based in Minnesota.[6][3][7][8]. Note the text following the company name explaining what it is, rather than leaving it to the reader's guess. It is not as magnificent a change as I would have liked, but fixing something that needs fixing is better than leaving it alone. FreeMediaKid$ 02:55, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

I have no concerns with this suggested change, though I might omit "based in Minnesota" for brevity's sake on an already long sentence. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 03:03, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

I went ahead and added it. I dropped the last bit since the article is about the person, not the company. FreeMediaKid$ 03:52, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Can someone fix this typo?

Under "Political Activites" -> "Attempts to overturn 2020 election":

"Lindell promoted a a conspiracy theory"

Thank you, fixed. 15 (talk) 00:20, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

My Pillow or MyPillow?

https://www.mypillow.com/ calls the company "MyPillow®". --Guy Macon (talk) 04:04, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

I went with what the subject article is named. I don't care whether there's a space or not, but we need to pick one version and use it consistently. —ADavidB 14:02, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

See discussion at Talk:My Pillow. --Guy Macon (talk) 14:20, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not God

I've noticed this problem on many Wikipedia pages related to the 2020 election, but have chosen to mention it here. You call claims of election fraud "false" and "misleading" without any attempt to debunk the alleged proof of it. You can believe or not believe that the election was frauded if you wish, but you need to tell your readers how you know, say, Lindell's claims are false with evidence debunking them. Also, keep in mind that a third of Americans believe these theories which you call "false" without providing any reasons. You can call me all sorts of names, but I just want to remind you of Wikipedia's NPOV guideline. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:CB00:103:9900:797E:C950:6B25:780E (talk) 20:31, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia describes those theories "false" (and similar) because so do reliable sources. There is plenty of detail at Attempts to overturn the 2020 United States presidential election, but it's not appropriate to go into that kind of detail in every article about someone who works to further those theories, and so we just say "false", "unevidenced", etc. as appropriate. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 20:39, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

One-third of Americans also believe in aliens and ghosts. That metric really isn't a high bar, so we'll just stick with what's established in reliable sources. – bradv🍁 20:47, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

I've taken a look at your contributions to try and find the namecalling, but I am not sure who has called you something disrespectful? Regardless, on the bright side, if similar sources start to back his ... ideas ... then Wikipedia would reflect that. If these ideas ended up being correct, and history bares that out, so too will the pages you are talking about. It can look strange to some but there is no censorship here, just the rules discussed by the two individuals above me. Quick, Spot the Quetzalcoatl! (talk) 22:17, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

This section has kinda voiced the issues I have been having with the page. I thought it was just me. I have been having issues with the lack of neutrality inside the biography and omission of stuff. Also just placement. I get Lindell's affiliation with Trump is huge but it feels like it overwhelms so many areas. Personally, I feel like his opinions about the 2020 election or controversial political opinions should be relegated to the politics section. I don't know if I am making sense...it's just the way biography is written, it feels less like an objective look at a person.--PricklyCactus2 (talk) 18:55, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

PricklyCactus2 Please identify specific passages you find problematic, it is difficult to respond to a general grievance. Please understand that Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources state; as such, Wikipedia does not claim to be free of bias and does not claim to be the truth. Only you can decide what is true for you, and the sources are presented to you so you can evaluate and judge their bias yourself. 331dot (talk) 19:24, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

331dot Oh, I understnad. I know it's hard to monitor bias. After all, everyone has it. Including me. I guess the best example is the My Pillow section. With the all information that is on My Pillow, this page only links to specifically negative things. It mentions losing BBB accreditation and retailers dropping them but nothing else. My Pillow started before 2017. I know I can add (and probably will) that information. I added the philanthropy section cause the Lindell foundation was only mentioned in one sentence in personal life. Those are just my observations though. I hope my explanation is understandable. --PricklyCactus2 (talk) 19:45, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

PricklyCactus2 No problem. Most MyPillow information is at MyPillow. News about it plus Lindell likely skews negative due to Lindell's political activities and views. 331dot (talk) 19:50, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

I am glad that everyone was civil in the way they spoke during this talk. I have watched a whole lot of people like me get roasted on other pages for pointing out this page's lack of neutrality. So...you all assure me that, if the theory that the election was frauded is proven true, you'll correct this page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:cb00:103:9900:fcb6:6921:1f2d:e262 (talk) 23:09, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Yes. If you feel so strongly about this topic, familiarise yourself with WP:Verifiability and read through the 28 archive pages of Talk:2020 United States presidential election. There is no need to waste people's time by rehashing election fraud arguments on this page. 15 (talk) 00:00, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2021‎ 2604:cb00:103:9900:60e8:9d6d:401f:4475 (talk) 23:58, 11 July (UTC)

@2604:CB00:103:9900:797E:C950:6B25:780E: Let's just pretend that I, and some other people, insisted Wikipedia is literally God. I could do what you just did and say something like,

You claim that "Wikipedia is not God" without any attempt to debunk the alleged proof of it. You can believe or not believe that Wikipedia is god, but you need to provide evidence that Wikipedia is not god. Also, keep in mind that a number of people believe Wikipedia is god, and you are simply dismissing it without providing any reasons.

See how ridiculous that sounds? Just sayin'.

And the fact that people "believe" something that is baseless does not make it anymore true. SecretName101 (talk) 21:37, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Struck out the less important part of comment that might detract from my overall point. SecretName101 (talk)

Creating a separate but connected Frank Speech page

I noticed that MyPillow has its own page but still is connected to Mike Lindell and has its own section. Shouldn't there be one for Frank Speech? Considering it is a company and it would cut out a lot of space that is being taken by having all the info on Mike Lindell's page. I wanted to hear if that is possible and what type of problems come with it. I am relatively new to editing at Wikipedia so I don't know the steps to it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PricklyCactus2 (talk • contribs) 15:09, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

@PricklyCactus2: There was one, but it was merged to this as a result of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Frank (website) (2nd nomination). Unless you can show that there has been a significant amount of coverage published since that deletion, it's not likely to be a good idea. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 15:18, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

@GorillaWarfare: Oh! I see. I understand but I am still curious about the process that comes to requesting creating a connected page. The guides can overwhelm me a bit. If you know, do you mind explaining the process or direct me to where I can read about it? I appreciate your time. PricklyCactus2 (talk) 11:38, 5 July 2021 (EST)

If the connected page is one that has been deleted in the past, such as in this case, you would probably want to go through WP:DRV. In the general case, you can just create the connected page yourself if you think it's fairly uncontroversial. If you're not sure and want to discuss whether a split should happen before going ahead and doing it, you can propose a split. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 17:24, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

@GorillaWarefare: thank you! I just was wondering because I didn't know when the split occurred. I know there has been more information coming out lately. Though I want to see if there is enough to warrant making separate pages before pulling that trigger. --PricklyCactus2 (talk) 18:45, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Add "conspiracy theorist" to description in the lede

One of his most notable ventures and greatest claims to fame is his role as a conspiracy theorist. This should be included in the lede description, which should read that he is a "businessman, entrepreneur, and conspiracy theorist" SecretName101 (talk)

We will need several sources identifying Mr. Lindell as such. Some of them might be in the article already for other purposes, but they will need to be specifically called out on this claim. 331dot (talk) 21:57, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

== And Crack Cocaine Addict == — Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.138.6.121 (talk) 16:35, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

His addiction history is mentioned in the Mike Lindell#Personal life section, but would be inappropriate to include in the lead as it is not a significant contributor to his notability. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 17:14, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

I concur. It would be inappropriate. Being a conspiracy theorist doesn't contribute to his notability. And putting his addiction lead isn't appropriate either. Although his recovery from addiction did influence Mike Lindell with the Lindell Foundation and other facets, he didn't become notable cause he was a world-renowned crack cocaine addict.--PricklyCactus2 (talk) 15:24, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

So we know he supported attempts to overturn the 2020 election, on the grounds that packets were moving between the U.S. and other countries. (I saw the packets moving during his presentation, which could only be explained as part of an organized effort by Democratic supporters committing election fraud.) Then he was pushing this poisonous plant extract as a Covid-19 cure, with no apparent scientific basis. Well, he's just doing his job as a businessman to try to get somebody to buy his stuff, regardless of whether there's any reason to think it would be efficacious. Clearly, he's the greatest medical expert since Trump! Fabrickator (talk) 15:47, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

But that isn't a claim to fame. Mike Lindell was known well before the conspiracies, so putting in the lead is inappropriate. And like 331dot said, that title has to be several verifiable sources to even make that claim he is one. Even then, the "conspiracy theorist" still might not belong in the lead. Not to mention, you have to gauge why you are putting it there and if it is constructive edit. --PricklyCactus2 (talk) 16:16, 26 July 2021 (UTC)