Talk:Badr bin Abdullah Al Saud

Potential rewrite – userspace draft
Hi, there are some issues with the current version, including some style issues and a lack of sources. I’ve prepared a userspace draft in which I’ve attempted to address these.

In this draft I have:

Hopefully someone can have a look. As I’ve made clear above and on my userpage, I work at the Ministry of Culture. Thanks. Darley-m (talk) 08:17, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Followed a more typical structure for a biography article - divided the current History and achievements section into Early life and education and Business career, and renamed Current Posts to Government positions.
 * Added a line to the introduction on previous role at SRMG.
 * Filled out the infobox and added an image of him.
 * From the History and achievements section I’ve removed the second sentence on Meric training in the UAE, which is not verified, and redrafted the remainder (all under Business career) - there’s a lot of puff in the current version e.g. “leading”, “outstanding”, which I’ve left out of my draft. The language in the last two sentences in the current History and achievements section is largely lifted from quotes of his biography in the NYT article - in my draft this information is a short sentence at the top of the Business career section.
 * The whole Current Posts section in the current version is unsourced. This section is redrafted in the Government positions section in my draft, which is based on reliable sources. There’s also more puff in the Current Posts section (“outstanding”, “unique zone” etc) which I’ve left out. The Government positions section in my draft is split into two subsections for clarity - Royal Commission for Al-Ula and Minister of Culture and other positions, following the chronology of those appointments.
 * On the purchase of the Salvator Mundi, the initial article on this (NYT) was sensationalist and speculative on this issue - unnamed buyers are perfectly commonplace in transactions like this. It was followed the next day by this article in the Wall Street Journal, which is what I’ve started with. The third sentence in the current section seems off-topic to me. I’ve left it out in this draft.

Reply 19-SEP-2018

 * 1) The proposed Minister infobox is only appropriate to use in an article on the position itself, rather than the person who occupies the position. In this case, the proper infobox to use would be the Officeholder infobox, which was appended to the article. Please note that there are several other parameters that may be used here with this variant that have not been asked for (including signature, etc.) and the COI editor is urged to review them here to determine if any other additional parameters may be desired, and if so, to request them here on the talk page.
 * 2) Please advise if any of the dates in the infobox need correcting—specifically—I have only the month and year of appointment for the role as Governor of the Royal Commission for Al-Ula, whereupon the full date of day, month and year would be preferred.
 * 3) The information in the prose of the article regarding His Highness's work as Governor of the Royal Commission for Al-Ula was limited to the first few proposed lines, as detailed information would be better suited in a separate article about that work.
 * 4) In the case of the acquisition of Salvator Mundi, I've reversed the order of the proposed paragraph's main elements, putting its final placement at the Louve Abu Dhabi first. As this is where the painting eventually ended up, this fact should be the main point of the paragraph, rather than the involvement of others up to and including His Highness and His Highness the Crown Prince. The suppositions made on December 7 in the Wall Street Journal on its acquisition seem secondary, and are addressed as such. The point regarding any "awkwardness" about the timing that the painting was acquired was omitted because it was not worded as being voiced by the New York Times.
 * 5) For reference, the differences between the COI editor's original proposed version shown on their draft page and the article's now previous version (before today's changes were implemented) may be seen here. The difference between the COI editor's original proposed version shown on their draft page and the article's final approved version implemented today may be seen here.
 * Regards,  spintendo   14:23, 19 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks a lot for having a look at this article and making these changes. I can’t find a source that gives the exact date of his appointment as governor of RCU but I will post back here if I do. Right now I don’t think there are any obvious other parameters to fill in the infobox but I will also post back here if there are.


 * Also his proper name (as in the first line of the article and the infobox) is actually Badr bin Abdullah bin Mohammed bin Farhan Al Saud - as reported here in Vogue Arabia. Is it okay to request a move? Darley-m (talk) 11:57, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 2 October 2018

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Moved. (non-admin closure) Iffy★Chat -- 13:23, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Badr bin Abdullah bin Mohammed Al Farhan → Badr bin Abdullah bin Mohammed bin Farhan Al Saud – His name is Badr bin Abdullah bin Mohammed bin Farhan Al Saud as in the New York Times, Reuters, other Reuters article, Arab News, SPA, Asharq Al-Awsat and Vogue Arabia (as well as the first line of the article and the infobox). There are some sources which have shortened it like Alarabiya and Asharq Al-Awsat which shorten it to Badr bin Abdullah bin Farhan Al Saud, and Bloomberg and Trade Arabia which shorten it to Badr bin Abdullah Al Saud, but these are not his official name. No sources call him Badr bin Abdullah bin Mohammed Al Farhan. Darley-m (talk) 12:47, 2 October 2018 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Connected contributor tag
please can you explain why you added this tag? I have a connection to the subject as I am an employee of the Ministry of Culture in Saudi Arabia, and I have disclosed this here and on my user page. I have not edited the article but instead made the edit request above which was reviewed by who implemented it with an explanation. Can you tell us what the problem is? Thank you. Darley-m (talk) 13:23, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
 * made several edits to the page therefore I added COI tag. --Saqib (talk) 15:06, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
 * The current version is very different from the last version by moc-ksa, and has been checked for neutrality by Spintendo when he implemented the edit request above. In any case moc-ksa's edits weren't even promotional. There was promotional language in the article (see this version) before moc-ksa made any edits (e.g. "protect and reinvigorate Al-Ula" … "a region of outstanding natural and cultural significance"). That promotional language has now gone after it was noted in my edit request. In my view there is no reason why this tag should remain here.
 * Do you have any present concerns with this version or with the edits that were made by moc-ksa? Thanks Darley-m (talk) 14:24, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I would appreciate a response to the above. Thanks. Darley-m (talk) 08:04, 1 April 2019 (UTC)