Talk:Dan Price

Birthplace and date
I deduced Dan's birth year as 1985 from two articles naming him as 29 and then 30, and saw that he was born in Michigan, but can't find a source with more specific info. If anyone who knows Dan or has a source for this info, please share here.TechnoTalk (talk) 20:10, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Extensive COI editing from Gravity Payments
Note: This article has been extensively edited by an IP linked to Gravity Payments. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 02:59, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I have reverted the article to the last NPOV version checked by an editor. The IP was from Gravity Payments and added a bunch of information which made the entire article seem like it was written by a fan. Please report any further COI editing to WP:COIN --Lemongirl942 (talk) 13:21, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

Ted talk video
Interestingly, I was looking for stuff and found that Dan Price was apparently involved in domestic abuse allegations by his ex-wife, although the video of the talk was somehow deleted. The story seems to have been reported multiple times I will read up later and see what I can add. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 13:47, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Internal emails: How a Seattle startup’s ‘drama’ became a Kentucky university’s problem
 * Video Containing Allegations Dan Price Abused His Ex-Wife Won't Publish and Has Been Deleted
 * The CEO Paying Everyone $70,000 Salaries Has Something to Hide
 * Dan Price Says Reports He Abused His Ex-Wife Are False
 * CEO who set $70,000 minimum wage: ex-wife's abuse accusations 'baseless'
 * Dan Price's Ex-Wife Stands By Domestic-Abuse Allegations in Latest Blog Post

Fix this page. Redirect doesn't seem logical due to persons large notoriety
I am a Seattle resident and was checking Dan's page because of his recent Lawsuit win and the Tesla his staff bought him with. I wanted to learn more. I saw what seemed like some type of editing war going on because some random accounts and someone named. I don't know anything about the back an d forth. I reverted your edit to to Gravity Payments page because it doesn't make sense to me. That's like having Steve Jobs revert to Apple, or Walt Disney revert to the Disney Corp. Dan is by far more notable than even the company he started and is widely popular around the world (that's how I hear about him). I don't use his products or own a small business. I just wanted to learn more, not about Gravity his company but about him. It seems this page is getting a lot of random people commenting back and forth. Someone should update it thouroughly with information on Dan. Not his company but things he has done. Also as a side note, I'm not sure if I tagged your usernames correctly or. Hope I did. I don't really know much about Wikipedia. But I removed edit and they accused me being in a major metropolis suspicious. So I thought I'd comment. Just looking at the view history (and please forgive my ignorance) there is information on a lot of edits both positive and negative that have been removed from competing parties. Why are so many parties allowed to go at war. It seems to me is at odds with either something because they keep removing information I as a fan of Wikipedia was searching for, example the litigation. I also wanted to learn more about the Tesla which I saw on the local news here in Seattle. Also I assume both And  are Wikipedia admins. So I trust you two to get this page back on track. It doesn't seem like a redirect is a solution but a way of giving up and encouraging more edit wars or something. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.77.205.50 (talk) 06:28, 21 July 2016‎


 * Repinging . Pings don't work unless entries are signed. Will respond next. Grayfell (talk) 06:29, 21 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the ping. To the IP: The reason I redirected it is because the subject is not independently notable other than his company. And his company is not a widely renowned company either like Facebook that would encourage me to keep a separate bio of the CEO. There has been long term COI editing on this article. New accounts have been created who have tried to add back all the puffery. This is way too much. I'm going to comment more in a while. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 06:45, 21 July 2016 (UTC)


 * To be blunt, I'm very skeptical of this. The article was targeted by multiple accounts very recently, one of which was blocked, and the other of which appears to be linked (at least circumstantially) to a paid sockfarm. That this same edit has been made by multiple editors and IP addresses from Seattle (and from the company itself?) within the last few hours adds to the impression that this is WP:COI related sock/meat puppetry. You just happened to stumble on this article? That's an extremely unfortunate coincidence. That you know to use Template:U but not how to format a talk page entry is also very unusual, and contributes to a sense that this is... fishy. It doesn't help that you're on a first name basis with the subject, either, and are comparing him to Steve Jobs and Walt Disney. One of many reasons this is a flawed comparison is that "Steve" and "Walt" have both had multiple book-length biographies published by reputable publishers. Can Mr. Price say the same thing? I'm not an admin, and I don't think Lemongirl942 is either (could be wrong about that) but that's not really how this works. I could point you towards some additional resources and next steps, but we need to address the COI problems, first. The way to solve this problem is to declare any COI, especially any paid editing per WP:PAIDEDIT, and then we can go from there. Grayfell (talk) 06:51, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Allow me to clarify &  When I click the edit link I can easily see how usernames are coded. I don't know much else, I'm literally learning as I interact with you. I don't think he has written biographies. So yes that's not a good comparison. Lets take the Bob Hoag page for example (not sure how to tag pages), far less notable. No edit war. This war itself lends to notoriety. But I first learned of the Dan back when he did the $70k thing and things keep popping up. Lawsuit. Ending the lawsuit. Then his employees gave him a Tesla in response to the $70k thing. I saw that on news and a lot of websites. So I wanted to check wiki and saw it was redirected. So I unredirected it. DIDNT mean to break a rule. I know Wikipedia is free and you all work hard to make it very objective. That's why I use it. But I just want the information on people I desire to research. I looked up page statistics, and this page has been viewed 23,119 times this month alone, 22,041 in the last 5 days. A coincidence? No. I'm one of 22,000+ people to check this page in the last 5 days. Redirecting this page is removing research and information requestions a lot of wiki readers desire. Please provide with resources for me to become a better Wikipedia user.


 * You unredirected it at least three times, if not much more, even after you were specifically asked to take it to a talk page. Wikipedia isn't a platform for promotion, and aggressively edit warring to restore a page isn't productive. Comparisons to hard-to-find page-view statistics, or to WP:OTHERSTUFF, are unlikely to get you anywhere, especially when you've already edit-warred from multiple IP addresses. "This war itself lends to notoriety." -No it doesn't. That's absurd. Grayfell (talk) 07:39, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Adding to the above, Wikipedia is not a news site. If you want news, you can read it on any other news website. If you want information about the subject, you can go to his website. I'm curious why would you come to Wikipedia even after you already knew about the Tesla news and the lawsuit. That and some other stuff in your reply has convinced me that your aggressive reverting of the redirect is nothing but COI editing. WP:NOTPROMO applies here. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 08:28, 21 July 2016 (UTC)


 * I am just confused by the redirect. Doesn't seem to make sense. That is all. I check Wikipedia because often there is a lot of good info on there. I'm not trying to edit the page. I don't know why the redirect is a solution.: — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.77.205.50 (talk) 14:40, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

& I won't continue the discussion. Neither of you believe me and you don't have a reason to, plus I don't know really how this works and you are the experts. But I was wondering, what your end goal is? Were either of you working on this page and then stuff started messing it up? Do either of you plan on actually writing the page? Thanks for your help and sorry if I messed anything up. 107.77.205.141 (talk) 15:08, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Deletion is too extreme a solution to block coi editing
I created this article, and got the photo from their media department. When the article was first COI flagged, I confirmed that I wasn't the one under suspicion. I notified the media department and they said they were not doing the edits. I can't vouch for them and they can't stop others from doing what they want, but if you can tell if the editing IPs match the company's server then those people have to be courtesy notified. They may not know the rules. Just showing that they are editing in the Seattle area isn't enough to prove COI. Seattle people are the ones most likely to have heard of the company and Price. I think it's better to fix the article than delete it. If anything, you did the redirect backwards. Price and his salary policy is more known than the company. You were going to put in the allegations of spousal abuse from all the sources you posted. That's notable, did you change your mind? Meanwhile the media coverage keeps on coming, suggesting this deletion was misguided. Maybe a 30/500 block instead to stop single purpose editing? I'd also like to see a discussion on this page about which edits are questionable. That's fair to the other editors who may not know. Everything I took came from my sources so I don't think mine were but everyone has a different opinion of promotionalism. I'll let you sort this out but I'm not seeing the consensus you claim to delete the article, only to stop COI editing. The only consensus there should be is to keep the article correct and neutral. There are better ways to do this.[][][][]TechnoTalk (talk) 17:43, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
 * The subject is not independently notable and it is a BIO1E. Now please stop edit warring. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 16:37, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Please stop your WP:OWN behaviour as well. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 17:37, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
 * The subject is independently notable. The lawsuit filed by his brother received a lot of coverage.  He was also recognized by Obama and was named entrepreneur of the year.[] [][][]. There's no consensus to delete the article.  Let others chime in before deleting the info and making it harder to find consensus.TechnoTalk (talk) 18:24, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes and consensus is that the subject is not independently notable. So stop undoing the redirect. Your behaviour is what is called WP:OWN. Keep doing it and you will be blocked. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 18:39, 19 September 2016 (UTC)


 * There's several weird things going on here. I'll get to the serious and undeniably COI issues next, but the Inc. article is, frankly bizarre in its own right. Since Inc. is one of those "contributor" outlets which now plague Wikipedia, like Huffington Post and Forbes, it's not always clear if it's reliable, or if it's churnalism, so I checked Paul Keegan, the article's author bio to see more. Every one of his recent stories for Inc that I checked mentions Dan Price in flattering terms, even ones with otherwise unrelated headlines. Every one of the author's tweets since October of 2015 has been about Dan Price, also. That's very weird to me, and raises a lot of questions about how much this is a real story, and how much this is essentially just corporate gossip or deep-cover PR. By itself that would be odd enough, but combined with the swarm of IPs and TechnoTalk's aggressive defense of highly promotional content, something is very fishy here.
 * After looking through TechnoTalk's contribution history, I feel that WP:AGF has been exhausted. The edit history of Academy of Achievement is especially telling, but there's a lot more where that came from. My opinion is that if a genuinely neutral editor wanted to take a stab at it, this might meet notability guidelines, although the Esquire profile is the only really compelling source that rises above PR or corporate gossip. Even that article indicates how heavily fixated on self-promotion he is (If you've heard of Dan Price—and God, does he hope you have—it's from the slew of multimedia appearances he has made since announcing...). For these reasons, I think at best, a draft could be started for further discussion, but a redirect is definitely preferable to covert advertising and disruptive PR games. Grayfell (talk) 22:10, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Potential sourcing problems with "hundredeightydegrees"
This article links to a source from a website called hundredeightydegrees.com. This site appears to have some potential sourcing problems, and makes extraordinary claims about a living person. The almost singular focus on a single person brings up potential NPOV concerns, in my opinion.

I am going to try to find better sources to support the claims referenced by this site, and see if the sourcing can be expanded or content reworked to not rely on this link. Anyone who is interested is welcome to help. Floridaman34747 (talk) 18:01, 30 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Upon more research, I think the hundredeightydegrees.com source should probably be entirely removed. Since this a WP:BLP, the standard for sensational claims is much higher. The self-published source does not have a mast head, doesn't advertise any fact checking or quality standards, and appears to have potentially been setup to just take on subject of the article. There are numerous links within that page that it relies on for sources, which are either dead or don't seem to be relevant to the claims made (potentially because the target no longer references the original material). The WP:BLPSPS policy suggests the source should be removed and replaced with better sourced facts. I am going to start making edits that clean this up and we will see where it lands. Floridaman34747 (talk) 18:27, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Lawsuit vs Brother Lucas
This section is confusing because several references are made using the last name only. Presumably, Dan and Lucas have the same last name, so the section isn't clear who is being discussed. kbachler (talk) 17:07, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Good point, I've fixed it. Schazjmd   (talk)  17:16, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 April 2022
Please remove subsection Allegations of abuse and assault, not part of personal life.

Add content below to Controversies:

In October 2015, Price's ex-wife Kristie Colón recorded a TEDx talk at the University of Kentucky in which she alleged that Price threw, punched, slapped, body-slammed and waterboarded her while they were married. Price's representatives notified the university that they considered Colón's remarks to be defamatory. The university later deleted its video footage of Colón's talk, which it had been planning to publish in December, and deleted information about her from the TEDx event's web site.[34] Price denied her claims of abuse, said the events Colón described never happened, and said that his wife never filed a police report.[35] In January 2016, Colón published a blog post standing by her accusations.[36] During Dan's legal battle with his brother Lucas, Dan refused to answer when Lucas's lawyer asked whether Dan had ever hit his wife. Dan denied Colón's allegations to an Esquire reporter, adding, "The honest truth of it is, there's only two people on earth that know. You could spend ten years with me and you still wouldn't know."[16]

In February 2022, Price was charged with fourth-degree assault with sexual motivation, fourth-degree assault, and reckless driving after a 26-year-old woman accused Price of forcibly attempting to kiss her. The woman also told police that Price was driving while intoxicated. Price's attorney issued a statement denying the woman's claims.[37][17] Hdmleuufoaw (talk) 03:06, 25 April 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ ★Ama   TALK   CONTRIBS  21:31, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

I have WP:BLP concerns about this article
Since this is blowing up on Twitter: Going through the accusations being made against Mr. Price, as per WP:BLP, we should not be making accusations of this nature without the highest quality of sources to back up the allegations. In particular, a lot of accusations use Entrepreneur as a source, but Entrepreneur is not WP:GENREL; they are WP:MREL and shouldn’t be used as a source for accusations this serious. Other sources used, mainly local news sites, are sites which have not had their reliability established on WP:RSP yet, and should not be the only sources of accusations this serious.

I will hold off on editing this article for now, but I ask editors to find WP:GENREL sources to back up the accusations, and to ideally limit any and all contentious accusations being made against Mr. Price to come from WP:GENREL quality sources. Even if a source is WP:GENREL, sources which are reliable for, say, technology articles, can have reliability issues when making accusations of this kind; see Talk:Marvin_Minsky/Archive_1 where I make the case that VentureBeat dropped the ball making a serious allegation against someone—albeit someone who is dead—even though they are considered generally reliable w.r.t. technology matters.

Here are examples sources which would be better for sourcing accusations of this nature: https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2022/08/18/dan-price-resigns/ and https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/18/technology/dan-price-resign-social-media.html

Samboy (talk) 23:05, 18 August 2022 (UTC)


 * I've added a few citations to this New York Times Article published today, which is based on interviews with more than 50 people and additional research. The Entrepreneur cites could be replaced with articles like those in the NYT and WaPo. White 720 (talk) 23:24, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
 * https://edition.cnn.com/2022/08/19/tech/dan-price-exits-sexual-assault-allegations/index.html --87.162.169.219 (talk) 00:46, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Additional source that may be useful for the article:
 * Toohey, Grace (August 24, 2022). Los Angeles Times "Dan Price, CEO known for giving raises, resigns after Palm Springs rape investigation" Cedar777 (talk) 14:57, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 August 2022
Dan Price page. “ Facebook flagged one of Price's tweets in March 2022,” FB doesn’t post tweets or when did that change? FB posts posts. 2601:681:0:51E0:B08F:9198:93C8:DAAC (talk) 05:28, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

The post on FB was a screen shot of one of Dan’s tweets. White 720 (talk) 06:03, 23 August 2022 (UTC)