Jump to content

Talk:Koch family

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Dimadick (talk | contribs) at 02:44, 23 June 2024. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Would it be appropriate to add a philanthropy section

The paragraph at the top of this page mentions their philanthropy. I think a philanthropy section that highlights entities named after the Koch family might be appropriate. There are similar things in the Rockefeller page. For example: David Koch Theatre, David H. Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research and Charles Koch Arena. These have Wikipedia pages and therefore meet notability requirements, etc. I am just not sure what the protocol or scope of the family page would be. Thanks! MBMadmirer (talk) 15:54, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

By all means, do! (I put the articles in a See also section, but they should be included in a proper section on philanthropy or whatever.) -- Petri Krohn (talk) 22:26, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've read the very noun philanthropy and though: what the fudge??? It should be awareness of the need for propagational measures labelled as philathropism. If that phenomenon centers on ones own state of well-being (including ones family a.s.o.) it should be called: egotism with a conscience.

I am wrinting this knowing nothing about that philanthropistic entity as the "billionaire"-fact. That's like calling a makrel "a method". Yuck!--78.51.207.169 (talk) 02:18, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Koch family. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:19, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Koch Family edits

(THE FOLLOWING HAS BEEN MOVED FROM MY USERTALK PAGE – S. Rich (talk) 01:51, 19 April 2018 (UTC))[reply]

As this my first effort to work to improve the quality of Wikipedia content, I am sure that I need to spend time learning the tools and procedures.

I am however concerned that I received an email stating that I removed content in the process of editing the posting. The original post stated, "According to investigative reporter Jane Mayer[26] and the environmental NGO Greenpeace, the Koch brothers have played an active role in opposing climate change legislation. Anthropogenic climate change denier Willie Soon received $230,000 from the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation.[27][28] Organizations that the Koch brothers help fund, such as Americans for Prosperity, The Heritage Foundation, the Cato Institute, and the Manhattan Institute, have been active in questioning global warming.[29] Americans for Prosperity and the Koch brothers influenced more than 400 members of Congress to sign a pledge to vote against climate change legislation that does not include offsetting tax cuts.[30][31][32][33]"

I cannot see where I deleted content but only added clarification. The updates I provided to this posting are highlighted.

According to investigative reporter and progressive activist Jane Mayer[26] and the environmental NGO Greenpeace, the Koch brothers have played an active role in opposing climate change legislation. Regarding the highly controversial theories espousing anthropogenic climate change, Willie Soon is reported to have received $230,000 from the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation.[27][28] Dr. Willie Soon, a physicist at the Solar and Stellar Physics. Division of the Harvard-Smithsonian. Center for Astrophysics in Cambridge,. Massachusetts, and an astronomer at the Mount Wilson Observatory in California's San Gabriel Mountains. He recently discussed with CEI his research on climate change. Organizations that the Koch brothers help fund, such as Americans for Prosperity, The Heritage Foundation, the Cato Institute, and the Manhattan Institute, have been active in questioning global warming because unlike most scientific theories that undergo decades of peer review, climate change has been highly politicized and tainted by inaccurate models.[29] Americans for Prosperity and the Koch brothers influenced more than 400 members of Congress to sign a pledge to vote against climate change legislation that does not include offsetting tax cuts.[30][31][32][33] This action helps to ensure that taxpayer funds are not improperly wasted on questionable solutions.

Please note that those who claim things like "settled science" taint the term science. Case in point, one of our greatest minds "theorized" the existence of gravitational waves. Yet, Einstein's theory was not, settled science and in fact underwent nearly 100 years of peer review. Only after decades of debate and significant efforts to develop techniques to verify his theory were we able to declare the actual existence of gravitational waves, and consider it... settle science. Therefore Ms. Mayer's inflammatory statement of "denier" should not meet the Wikipedia standards and prompted me to provide additional background about Dr. Willie Soon, a Harvard professor. Furthermore, efforts to blunt reactionary legislation supporting disputed and contentious theoretical positions should not be painted in a negative fashion.

Please advise what content was deleted. Further, if there is any concern regarding the clarification I provided the original post, please let me know what I can do to help. I will gladly work to learn the tools provided and to link references where you feel they are needed.

Morrisdlx (talk) 00:13, 19 April 2018 (UTC)morrisdl[reply]

(Comment by a talk page stalker.) Morrisdlx, your edits clearly advance your personal point of view, and also contains factual errors. You are editorializing which simply is not allowed. Please read our core content policy requiring that articles be written from the neutral point of view. This is mandatory. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:24, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Morrisdlx (talk) 01:08, 19 April 2018 (UTC)morrisdl Cullen328 ... First I am dubious to responding to a "page stalker" as this may be the same as a troll on other sites but, never the less. Please identify the statements that you think are "personal point of view" and not factual.[reply]

For example:

  • Ms. Mayer is a reporter for The Guardian a very biased publication.
  • Anthropogenic climate change is a theory and as such not scientific fact. Research in this area as been further tainted by skewed models and the injection of governmental tax efforts.
  • Ms. Mayer used the very inflammatory term "denier" without qualification and without any further data on Dr. Soon's qualifications or area research. Note: this is an actual violation of the "neutral point of view" requirement.
  • Lastly, Ms. Mayer "implies" that efforts to blunt knee-jerk legislation is somehow bad. This is just incorrect.
  • Just read Dark Money and it makes clear that the Koch family is a prime contributor to climate denial and fake news. Well documented. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 145.5.126.47 (talk) 18:13, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This is an interesting talk addition which is obviously very bias in itself.
Calling The Guardian a very biased publication is a clear indicator. The News outlet is measured as Left of Centre on several media bias measure sights so not one way or the other "very biased" although its articles do come from journalists and commentators across the political spectrum most are seen as being from the Left. www.allsides.com/media-bias/media-bias-chart
That the poster also claims that Anthropogenic climate change is a theory which is a highly debunked claim: science.nasa.gov/climate-change/evidence
The Koch family is a touchy subject due to claims that they are funding far right "Fascist" groups through various sub groups; one claim being the directing of funding through one such group The Middle East Forum with claims that Tommy_Robinson_(activist) receives £10,000 ($12,730) per month to support his "Far Right" political aims;[[1]] www.commondreams.org/views/2021/01/21/how-fossil-fuel-industry-funds-fascism www.opendemocracy.net/en/5050/the-american-dark-money-behind-europes-far-right
The aim of the Koch family and other super rich families is seen as "buying out politics" in order to increase and maintain their wealth through suppressing fair taxation on them while curtailing any moves within democracy or law to stifle their business or power which is observed to be damaging democracy, politics and economies; www.csmonitor.com/Business/Robert-Reich/2015/0408/How-the-Koch-brothers-and-the-super-rich-are-buying-their-way-out-of-criticism www.oxfamamerica.org/explore/stories/top-5-ways-billionaires-are-bad-for-the-economy Colinc1000 (talk) 12:33, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So, Cullen328, I look forward to seeing details and factual inputs documenting where you ... feel... I have been pressing my point of view, which by Wikipedia standards means, "representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, ..." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Morrisdlx (talk • contribs) 01:07, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Global Warming

This page is disturbingly whitewashed. Nowhere does it mention the (tens of?) billions of dollars that have gone into delaying action on anthropogenic environmental chaos. The history books will call this wiki page propaganda rightly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 145.5.126.47 (talk) 18:10, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

silent partner

I'm looking for a silent partner to help take my business to the next level..theehoneydohandyman@gmail.com... hope to hear back for the Koch family soon. 100.34.18.249 (talk) 18:11, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Wikipedia has its own style guidelines"

[2]

But Wikipedia's style guidelines do not say we have to use a dishonest euphemism for a pseudoscientific position. "Denier" is the word usually used by experts. We should at least not replace the word "denier" used in the source by "skeptic", as in the Willie Soon sentence. I replaced it and added a wikilink. --Hob Gadling (talk) 06:38, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Climate change denial

The Koch brothers have had massive influence in the financing of global climate change denial for decades. This should be featured prominently on the page. Making edits that clarify this in no way constitutes "vandalism" Anfreas (talk) 15:36, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pollution & Deaths

Strongly suggest a heading reflecting Charles and David Koch’s multiple environmental pollution and hazardous waste violation lawsuits with guilty verdicts in Texas, Minnesota and Louisiana. Especially the leaked butane gas line that caused a young woman and her friend to burn to death in their vehicle in Texas. 71.251.150.105 (talk) 20:34, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Koch_family&oldid=1230500667"