Talk:Elon Musk/Archive 5

Grimes
"He and Canadian singer Claire "Grimes" Boucher split up last year after rapper Azealia Banks released a cache of texts, claiming they showed Grimes revealing intimate details of her boyfriend’s life." Benjamin (talk) 13:43, 15 January 2019 (UTC)


 * The Sun isn't exactly held in great esteem as a reliable source, but then again for personal life gossip it might just about make the cut if you can't find anything better. But make sure you at least change "last year" to "in 2018". Rosbif73 (talk) 14:38, 15 January 2019 (UTC)


 * How about we just be cautious in the meantime and not assert that they're currently dating? All we know for sure is that they were dating some time in the past. Benjamin (talk) 15:04, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
 * This call hers an ex-girlfriend . --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 21:59, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

I added, "As of early 2019, their relationship status is unclear. " Benjamin (talk) 12:07, 23 January 2019 (UTC)


 * The information -- if true -- is probably worth adding, but the Sun is a terribly unreliable source for WP:BLPs. Can we find a better source ton back up this claim? The cnbc.com source doesn't appear to specifically say that their relationship status is unclear. --Guy Macon (talk) 16:08, 23 January 2019 (UTC)


 * It calls her an ex-girlfriend, but I maybe wouldn't go so far. I'm mostly indifferent to the exact wording, but there seems to be enough for at least a mention. Also, I'm curious, why do you mention Truth? Benjamin ([[User talk:Be


 * A slip of the keyboard. I of course meant "Verifiable though citations to multiple, independent, reliable, secvondary sources as explained by the quote at the top of User:Guy Macon (VtctmirssaebtqattoUGM). --Guy Macon (talk) 05:42, 24 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Anyway, what do you think of cnbc saying ex-girlfriend? Benjamin (talk) 05:54, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

I added it back. Benjamin (talk) 09:00, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Please discuss. Benjamin (talk) 03:17, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Clear violation of BLP. The sentence is a matter of pure speculation and contains no precise statement of fact.  WP is not a gossip column.  sirlanz 03:41, 28 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Is cnbc a reliable source? Benjamin (talk) 03:47, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
 * This is not about quality of source; it is about what is sought to be added to the encyclopaedia. WP is not a newspaper.  What WP publishes is published on entirely different principles.  sirlanz 03:59, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't think WP:NOTNEWS applies in this case. Benjamin (talk) 11:29, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Let's not shift the goalposts here. I was merely pointing out that the fact even a reputable newspaper may publish something does not establish per se that WP will.  The material is pure speculation and we do not publish speculation here, as a general rule and particularly in BLP.  sirlanz 11:37, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I think the source is reliable for the claim. But even if it is so uncertain, we should at least avoid implying that they're still dating. Benjamin (talk) 11:53, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
 * The infobox says "Grimes (2018)" not "(2018–)", and the body of the article claims that they began dating in 2018 but does not in any way imply anything further about the relationship. In the absence of some more notable event in Elon's personal life, it seems to me that the status quo respects BLP policy in general and WP:NOTGOSSIP in particular. Rosbif73 (talk) 13:06, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
 * This isn't "promoting things "heard through the grapevine"", as that page says. The information is coming from a reputable news source; I'm not just making it up. Benjamin (talk) 13:33, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Will this ever be removed? Blackraider18 (talk) 01:17, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 April 2019
Elon Musk does not have an engineering degree or professional license as described [|here]. He employs engineers, but is not one himself. I am requesting this be reflected in his Wikipedia page by removing the work "engineer" from "occupation" and the abstract. BrandonC93 (talk) 01:00, 30 April 2019 (UTC)


 * ❌. We've been through this before, see . He is an engineer (as per the cited source and previous consensus), just not a licenced professional one. Rosbif73 (talk) 07:00, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

The "sited source" on ASME is a 404 page not found link, and the consensus below your initial reply on the talk page seems to disagree with you. Being an engineer is something people have a lot of pride in and take very seriously. Handing out the title is detrimental to the work engineers do and their public perception, like calling an herbalist or acupuncturist a doctor. He is a self prescribed engineer, but has no education or training in engineering. He also doesn't practice engineering; he manages actual engineers, but you cant call him an engineer based on other people's work or because he wants to be called an engineer. Asking employees to design something does not make you an engineer. He's an entrepreneur and an inventor, but not an engineer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BrandonC93 (talk • contribs) 13:12, 30 April 2019 (UTC)


 * I've added an archive link to the ASME source. The fact that this has gone unchallenged since it was last discussed six months ago indicates at least some degree of consensus, despite the single negative reply on the archived talk thread. Bear in mind that, as mentioned in Engineer, "The perception and definition of the term 'engineer' varies across countries and continents." Rosbif73 (talk) 13:35, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

I read the article. If I knew I could just call myself an engineer, I would have saved a lot of time and money on college. Regardless, thank you for replying. BrandonC93 (talk) 15:58, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 May 2019
Treyk4321 (talk) 13:50, 14 May 2019 (UTC) PAGE ]]) 13:56, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. --Ahecht ([[User talk:Ahecht|TALK

Semi-protected edit request on 19 May 2019
I love Musk, but he was an early investor of Tesla, Martin Eberhard founded Tesla. Musk talked with Eberhard about the name of the company and financially backed it. Musk did not take over until the in company coup in 2008. 70.142.45.95 (talk) 15:32, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. &mdash; KuyaBriBri Talk 13:42, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Why are admins refusing to protect this page indefinitely?
This article has been protected 20 times, yet only temporary protections are being applied as if disruptive editing was ever going to stop anytime soon. Is there a reason for not applying indefinite protections or is this just an oversight? Saucy[talk – contribs] 03:29, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Very less criticisms
IMO the article fails to summarize the criticisms made against Musk, especially on the lead. THE NEW  Immortal  Wizard  (chat) 16:05, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Edit request 11 July 2019
Pardon me if I'm doing this wrong :) I rarely find errors to fix on Wikipedia because you guys do an amazing job!!!

Current broken link under References: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elon_Musk#cite_ref-18 Title: elon musk on dodging a nervous break down URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IxTPKIvn--A

Working Link replacement found on YouTube: URL:

Thank you, and may the information force be with you! Dinoraptor101 (talk) 00:53, 11 July 2019 (UTC)


 * ❌.  Please see WP:COPYVIOEL for some relevant policy.  Since the statement was already supported by a perfectly good source, I simply removed the unavailable video.  –Deacon Vorbis (carbon &bull; videos) 01:07, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Copied from helpdesk
I am copying the below post that was left on the helpdesk, but more properly belongs on the article talk page, just in case there is anything actionable in it. ~  ONUnicorn (Talk&#124;Contribs) problem solving 13:30, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Elon Musk / Errol Musk (father)
I have been asked by friends to read your article on Elon Musk.

There are some substantial errors in this article.

The article seems to suggest that Elon 'swam' from South Africa to North America when he was 17 (a few days before his 18th birthday). Without listing the errors, which you can read, Elon spent his entire youth with me, not "mostly". His mother was entirely absent.

Elon's ability to program came from me acceding to his pleas and buying him in 1982 the first IBM XTA personal computer in South Africa. The computer cost as much as a Mercedes motor car. I did this willingly and because I saw his aptitude for computing. I hold both FOTRAN and COBOL diplomas.

He was never "bullied" at school. Had this occurred I would have seen to it immediately. The fact is, he called one of his classmates, a smaller boy, a "monkey" and followed that up by calling the boy's mother (a single parent) a "monkey". Blacks and colored people are very sensitive on such an issue. When this boy saw his chance he pushed Elon down a long flight of concrete stairs. At the bottom, Elon being severely stunned, the boy proceeded to pommel Elon's face. On learning the facts I could take no action against the boy that pushed Elon. When Elon recovered I removed him from that school and enrolled him in a better school in another city, Pretoria. This required that I buy a house in Pretoria, in the best suburb, which I did. When he matriculated I offered Elon any university in South Africa. He chose Pretoria University, my alma mater. It is a good university and a leader in many fields, particularly tropical diseases and veterinary science.

When I saw he was very unhappy there, I was the one who suggested he go to North America, and the only one capable of doing this for him. Elon, and his brother and sister, had been to virtually all the countries in the world with me by that time, and several times to the USA and Canada. I was confident that he had learned enough from me, so I sent him to the US Consulate to get information on universities in the USA from my friend the US Ambassador. He left South Africa ten days later on a flexible return ticket and with sufficient funds from me for several months.

Elon subsequently enrolled at Queen's University in Kingston, Ontario, on a government loan. In the meantime I sent him and his brother and sister, who had also moved to Canada, all the funds I would have used to send them to university in South Africa.

Elon applied to the Canadian Government for me to immigrate to Canada, using his own funds, which still brings me to tears. I received permission as a Landed Immigrant, sponsored by E. R Musk (son). The Landed Immigrant document is available for perusal, signed by Elon. I did not go there as I found Canada to be a somewhat dull place compared to Africa, much to Elon's disappointment, and I am sorry for this.

I don't mind being called "a terrible person". It better than fake accolades from one's children. My task as a father was not to be a 'pal', but a father. I feel I succeeded at that.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.77.201.82 (talk) 10:10, 19 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Assuming, in good faith, that the above really is from Errol Musk, I don't see anything in the article that fits the description of "substantial errors", and certainly not anything that we can or should change without confirmation from an independent, reliable source. Rosbif73 (talk) 14:05, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 July 2019
Please add 'See Talk" under Early Life, after "....terrible human being." 41.77.201.82 (talk) 19:25, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * We do not make self-referential links to talk pages in the body of articles.  G M G  talk  19:30, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Title section in the summary side bar has some inaccuracies.
To the best of my knowledge, Elon is not the CEO of Neuralink. The CEO of Neuralink is Jared Birchall Also Solar City was bought by Tesla, so I don't think Elon can be the Chairman of Solar City any more. Thanks very much. JacksonKP (talk) 18:35, 21 July 2019 (UTC)JacksonKP (PS: So, how does this work? Musk's page is locked.  How does it get updated?)
 * The page is semi-protected, so any confirmed user can update it. If your account isn't (yet) confirmed or autoconfirmed, you can use the Edit semi-protected template here to request a change, citing a reliable source. Note that another wikipedia page doesn't count as a reliable source, see WP:UGC.

Wants to be known also as "a Magnet"

 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Listening to Joe Rogan with Elon Musk today, Elon mentions at timestamp 10:05 to 10:33 that he wants to be a magnet. Thoughts on making that change?

Sept 6, 2018 pod cast. B.Valley (talk) 19:04, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
 * No.  G M G  talk  19:04, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Please make this happen. MagnaArtium (talk) 21:28, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
 * @MagnaArtium Please read Reliable sources ~  Mitchellhobbs (talk) 21:53, 13 June 2019 (UTC)


 * ✅TeeVeeed (talk) 18:31, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
 * There was no consensus for including this joke comment in the article. Do not restore it. Hrodvarsson (talk) 02:32, 16 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Please do not edit war this. I am changing it back and I hope we can discuss it here, thanks! TeeVeeed (talk) 13:17, 16 July 2019 (UTC)


 * You boldly inserted this trivia, it was reverted. The next stage in the WP:BRD process is to discuss the change BEFORE reinstating it. Please do not reinstate again unless consensus to do so emerges here. Rosbif73 (talk) 13:34, 16 July 2019 (UTC)


 * I do not think this should be added. It is pure media trivia. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:42, 16 July 2019 (UTC)


 * I'm going to respect consensus here and not 3rr it but really the disputed edit should be left in while consensus is established if we are respecting protocol here. (maybe not since more than one editor has rv it?) Also if the undone edit is going to be left reverted the edit request here needs to be changed.TeeVeeed (talk) 13:46, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
 * We are not going to include this in the article. Making a joke while drunk on a popular podcast does not constitute an emergency on our part.  G M G  talk  13:52, 16 July 2019 (UTC)


 * A-The pot-smoking occurred after the request was made FYI. (about the 10. to 11-minute mark on the referenced podcast.). We need to establish a real consensus here. TeeVeeed (talk) 14:43, 16 July 2019 (UTC)


 * A pot-smoking magnate? That sounds more notable. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:49, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I didn't say he was stoned. I said he was drunk. The consensus is this is not going in the article. This is already been discussed. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. It is not a tabloid and it is not an indiscriminate list of pop culture trivia.  G M G  talk  14:57, 16 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Look back at the talk page history: in the days and weeks following the podcast, numerous "business magnet" edits or edit requests were made, and all of them were reverted or rejected. There's even a FAQ entry at the top of this talk page. Admittedly, your edit just mentioned the quip rather than actually changing the description of Elon in the lead, but nevertheless this remains trivia, of no encyclopedic value. Rosbif73 (talk) 14:59, 16 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Do you guys even read the edits and articles you insist on warring over? In the Joe Rogan interview section of the article, it is clearly stated that MUSK is most certainly NOT a regular pot-smoker and that is why he became a little goofy from smoking. He was not drunken at all during the podcast and I don't know what that has to do with content anyhow, and as stated already here Musk made the comment about WP before he indulged. This has been a contentious edit and I really thought that I had solved it by including it in the Joe Rogan section specifically, NOT vandalizing the article but inserting an edit that many other editors have been RV'd and undone. It fit perfectly with the Joe Rogan section imo AND solved edit-war probs. because it was encyclopediac and adds to the article We need a real consensus.TeeVeeed (talk) 15:03, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

RfC: Should Musk's comment about Wikipedia on Joe Rogan be included in the Joe Rogan section or not?
In the hopes of finding consensus, should remarks that Musk made about this article on the Joe Rogan podcast be included in the section about the podcast? Specifically that he asked for an edit change from calling him a business "magnate" to "magnet". Please note that Musk should not be referred to as a "magnet" using Wikipedia's voice although mentioning the request is encyclopedic and is contextually relevant.TeeVeeed (talk) 15:27, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Survey

 * Support or Oppose inclusion of the content here thank you. TeeVeeed (talk) 15:27, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Consensus does not mean continually raising an issue until you get the answer you want.  G M G  talk  15:33, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
 * He's not called "a magnate", he's called "a technology entrepreneur, investor, and engineer"; so his little podcast joke, from four months ago, falls a bit flat. If Mr Musk wants to come to this talk page and make an edit request himself (assuming he's not "off his tits on dope"), he's welcome to do so. But until he does arrive, I don't think this self-reflective piece of media trivia is worthy of inclusion, or indeed of any RfC. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:48, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Sorry that you guys don't seem to understand the question. It is not do we call Musk a magnet/magnate in the voice of WP, the question is should we add the content about his request (possibly as a quote?) to the appropriate section in the article.-thanks!TeeVeeed (talk) 18:59, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I understand the question.  G M G  talk  19:08, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I also understand the question. Yes, it's "contextually relevant". But so would be a verbatim transcript of the entire interview. Is mentioning the request (even remotely) encyclopedic? No. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:19, 16 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Oppose Consider it this way. Using your criteria, have you any idea how many articles on athletes/actors/politicians/etc. would have to be updated to add "So-n-so said 'I am a god!'"? Or comics and "I am so funny!" Of course, evil scientists would need "I am a genius!" added, yes? Sorry but why would we take a throw-away line out of the waste basket and add it to Wikipedia? "It does not make sense!" makes more sense. Shenme (talk) 03:26, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
 * If an evil scientist said, "I am a genius." in an interview, as per your example, and there is a section in an article about that interview, (like this article has a section about the Joe Rogan interview), it would be fine to say, "Evil scientist is quoted as saying, "I am a genius." We don't have to edit every article to include every self-refrencing statement made during interviews just because some articles do, so I do not understand your point there?TeeVeeed (talk) 05:15, 17 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Oppose Musk is a highly notable and highly historic and highly eccentric figure, and if he has any actual substantive input regarding this article, he is perfectly capable of making an edit request here himself. We should not indulge his whimsical word choice requests made elsewhere, and his offhand remarks should not affect his Wikipedia biography in any way. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  04:48, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes Musk made a verbal edit request on another platform, but for the purposes of this edit request, (which is still marked "approved" incorrectly the last time that I checked as the rv editor has not corrected it), editors in THIS section and on this TP, have made the request.TeeVeeed (talk) 05:19, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, but this RFC is clearly motivated by Musk's request. Please do not feel it necessary to attempt to refute every editor who chooses to oppose this request, . That is a poor idea. I am still opposed. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  05:30, 17 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Oppose. While the suggestion of merely mentioning Musk's quip is clearly far better than actually changing the lead as "requested", which would be an absolute no-no as discussed previously, it's still nothing more than non-noteworthy trivia. It might seem more relevant in that it mentions Wikipedia, but consider this: if you were writing an article about Musk for an encyclopedia other than Wikipedia, would you consider its inclusion? I certainly wouldn't. Rosbif73 (talk) 06:53, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose attempts to add silliness to an encyclopedic article. Articles do not contain everything so judgment has to be used. Johnuniq (talk) 07:04, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose, just in case I wasn't making myself clear here. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:37, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Irrelevant and fairly ridiculous micro-trivia. Softlavender (talk) 09:48, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose - Because a) it was just an off hand remark that was meant as a little joke on a podcast. If we're going to hunt interviews for every bit of self-mythologizing Elon Musk does, this page will never know peace. and b) it's not even a particularly funny joke. I guess it can work in context, but dragging it out of said context and trying to jam it into the wiki article does a disservice to both the wiki page and the joke itself. PraiseVivec (talk) 11:50, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose - agree with comments from Johnuniq and Rosbif73. Just because this article already has a reference to Elon hosting "Meme Review", should not mean more content of similar (or worse) caliber should be included. --ColumbiaXY (talk) 05:54, 25 July 2019 (UTC)


 * The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Semi-protected edit request on 31 August 2019
Change "is a technology entrepreneur, investor, and engineer." to "is an African-American technology entrepreneur, investor, and engineer.".

Similarly to Gaspar Noé being Argentine-French (i.e. born in Argentina but now being of French citizenship) and Jim Carrey being Canadian-American (born in Canada and now having Canadian and American citizenship), Elon Musk is truly African-American, having been born in South Africa and now holding citizenship in the U.S.

I would like to see this addition made to his page, as it is valuable, correct information regarding the subject. It is commonplace on Wikipedia to see the nationality-citizenship of a person given in their initial description, so it is certainly appropriate to add this information to Elon's page.

Please note that he is not "African American" but "African-American" and that this distinction is important. While African Americans are black Americans, African-Americans are those born in Africa who now hold citizenship in the U.S. Halfinjest (talk) 16:26, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

❌ This has been discussd before, and the current wording that puts his professions in the first sentence and his countries of citizenship in a separate second sentence is the result of consensus. Rosbif73 (talk) 16:42, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 September 2019
Im sorry to interrupt anyone during the use of your precious time by suggesting this change.

I do like the idea however, that the best first words to describe Elon Reeve Musk after "Elon Reeve Musk FRS (/ˈiːlɒn/; born June 28, 1971) is a" would be " Business Magnet " after that, the article should continue like it does at the moment.

My propose comes from a long time studying him threw his biography, conferences he attended, informations about him and his companys threw the internet, wikipedia and videos. I really believe that this Description fits his work and definition best. It really seems to be the case that he studied so many areas so that he really attracts business ideas, great people and overall aknowlegdement. This would also put the aspect of him not beeing a businessman, but rather an engineer in focus. Let me know what you think about this proposal and keep striving for knowledge!

Best Regards Daniel Leinert (talk) 22:19, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: This (the subject's desire to be described as a "business magnet" here) has been thoroughly discussed here many times and rejected each time. See the FAQ at the top of this page.  We do not describe subjects as they would like to be described, but as they are described in published, reliable media.  None have described him as such (and the phrase is erroneous anyway -- the correct term is "business magnate," not "magnet."  Most likely, Musk is just trolling us through this request.) <span style="font-family: Gill Sans MT, Arial, Helvetica; font-weight:140;"> General Ization  <i style="color: #000666;">Talk </i> 22:23, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
 * To put this in context, the lead did describe Musk as a "business magnate" at the time he made this jestful "request". Rosbif73 (talk) 06:44, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Double quotes (") inside double quotes
In the Tesla section it states:

According to ABC News, "As recently as Oct. 4 2018, Musk issued a sarcastic tweet, describing the agency [SEC] as the “Shortseller Enrichment Commission,” despite having agreed to settlement terms a week earlier that his company, Tesla, would monitor his tweets and other communications."

shouldn't it read like this instead? (I put the changes, the qoutation marks, in big): According to ABC News, ' As recently as Oct. 4 2018, Musk issued a sarcastic tweet, describing the agency [SEC] as the “Shortseller Enrichment Commission,” despite having agreed to settlement terms a week earlier that his company, Tesla, would monitor his tweets and other communications. '

I would make the changes myself, put the page is locked, so i can't.

TGRFAN (talk) 02:39, 10 October 2019 (UTC)TGRFAN


 * It's the opposite, but I implemented a fix. Thanks :) UpdateNerd (talk) 03:55, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 November 2019
{i want to write on this page because it is missing a lot of things so it is uptodate} Rktlucas (talk) 06:41, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

❌ Rosbif73 (talk) 07:43, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

New problems
There was a photo of Elon Musk and Ghislaine Maxwell, also known as Hoch, in 2014. More recently, a collision took place with a bollard. With suicides by Abraham and Epstein, I am wondering what will happen to Ghislaine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.55.248.11 (talk) 10:00, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I am not sure if the bollard was made of plastic or concrete. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.55.248.11 (talk) 10:16, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

From the video, it appeared the sign was mounted to a plastic cone and easily rightable after it was knocked over.

Education
I noticed two things about Elon's education: - With regards to his time at Stanford, there is no indication in the reference that he was in a graduate program, just that it was his intent to pursue a PhD. For all the article indicates, he could have just been in some undergrad courses. Therefore, the section should be re-written to be more accurate. - With regards to his BA and BSc, it seems odd that you would receive a BA in Physics and BS in Economics. Most North America programs are BSc in Physics and BA in Economics. Perhaps better to just call them bachelors as clarifying. I suspect the Mercury News article writer was just plain wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Factyou (talk • contribs) 17:50, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Education
I noticed two things about Elon's education: - With regards to his time at Stanford, there is no indication in the reference that he was in a graduate program, just that it was his intent to pursue a PhD. For all the article indicates, he could have just been in some undergrad courses. Therefore, the section should be re-written to be more accurate. - With regards to his BA and BSc, it seems odd that you would receive a BA in Physics and BS in Economics. Most North America programs are BSc in Physics and BA in Economics. Perhaps better to just call them bachelors as clarifying. I suspect the Mercury News article writer was just plain wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Factyou (talk • contribs) 17:50, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Business 🧲
Can someone please add "business magnet" for the shits and giggles? Takikumo (talk) 20:32, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
 * No. "Shits and giggles" are -->thataway. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib)

Removal of investor
before someone decides to change it back, here’s why this change has been made: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1208830673995198465?s=21 ALittleBitQuirky (talk) 19:28, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Should be referenced as a source and clarification. Halikular (talk) 19:44, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
 * As linked by ALittleBitQuirky at the start of this section, Mr. Musk today requested via his verified Twitter account that "investor" be deleted from our lede. "I do basically zero investing," he asserted. Within a minute, an editor complied. Half an hour later, I removed two unsupported mentions of his investment history, leaving only his investments in AI, which he explains are "not from the standpoint of actually trying to make any investment return ... I like to just keep an eye on what's going on with artificial intelligence." This quotation is referenced by an 18 Jun 2014 article at The Guardian. Given that we no longer claim he has made investments in the past five years, it's not necessary to incorporate his tweet into the article. NedFausa (talk) 20:32, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
 * No disagreement, just want to suggest that you remove it also on the page "Elon". And maybe others linking here. (anon) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.75.101.18 (talk) 21:26, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅ at Elon only. Please specify "others linking here." NedFausa (talk) 21:38, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Speaking of Twitter, now comes a relevant thread on that platform from the verified account of CNBC.com reporter Lora Kolodny, whose beat includes Tesla. "It would be crazy," she tweets, "to erase 'investor' from his wiki bio. He's a fundraising genius, and LP in venture funds." A commenter named Justin replied, "Wikipedia doesn't normally accept edits contradicted by old urls but it is elon who wants to change history."
 * Lora Kolodny subsequently tweeted (with cc to Jimmy Wales), "Asking for someone to axe a fact from his own bio, then getting @Wikipedia editors to acquiesce is going well beyond Musk asking for deserved recognition of the other things he does." She also retweeted a link to a May 7, 2019 MarketWatch story, "Tesla CEO Elon Musk spent $25 million to buy more stock, boosting stake to nearly 20%," which suggests that he is still very much an investor, in Tesla at least.
 * I add this to our discussion because Wikipedia may face blowback for altering Mr. Musk's BLP at his request, and I am one of the editors who did so. The idea that we have shown him special favor is, I believe, false. But it's just the sort of alleged bias the critics of Wikipedia love to spread across social media, and uninvolved editors may want to scrutinize our actions. NedFausa (talk) 05:25, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
 * If there's evidence of the counter-statement being wrong, why is the fact that Elon Musk is an investor no longer evident on this entry? 25 million dollars, per Kolodny, is a huge investment from a single individual by most estimations. I'm also seeing multiple references to edits being due to Elon Musk "asking" for them - shouldn't these requests be brought to Wikipedia itself by Musk or a representative party via the method? QRep2020 (talk) 06:17, 23 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Should I attempt to readd mention of his investing? I don't want to deal with warring edits today. QRep2020 (talk) 15:14, 23 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Investopedia isn't the best source, but Inside Elon Musk's Portfolio indicates significant investments and may be a good starting point for well-sourced coverage of his investment activity.
 * Complaints by the subject of an article present a good opportunity to reevaluate and improve our content, however we absolutely do not remove content solely at their request. Unfortunately Musk's request seems to be based more on his desired branding than facts; "I don't consider myself an investor" doesn't make him a non-investor. –dlthewave ☎ 16:07, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
 * This is a valuable discussion to have. On the one hand, as dlthewave says, we write biographical articles based on independent reliable sources, not based on the subject's self-image. On the other hand, it's not clear to me whether most of those independent reliable sources consider "investor" to be among the occupations Musk is most noteworthy for - and only those should be listed in the first sentence of a biographical article (that's why, for example, the intro to J. R. R. Tolkien does not describe him as a visual artist). What's more, Musk seems to have a point that upon reading "investor", many people might not think of someone who also founded the company they invested in, or who lead it as an executive.
 * FWIW, "investor" seems to have first been added to the lede in this edit from 2013 (with a rather misleading edit summary), by a now blocked user. Regards, HaeB (talk) 16:56, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Argument for inclusion: The man owns about 22% of the shares of Tesla and the majority of his wealth is tied up in securities. He even said in court that he doesn't have much "liquidity". Investing is crucial aspect of his professional life. By the way, this is getting even more attention now: https://www.inc.com/don-reisinger/elon-musk-took-issue-with-his-wikipedia-page-so-he-asked-community-to-fix-it-they-did.html. QRep2020 (talk) 19:24, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
 * With respect, to support inclusion in the first sentence of our lede—which now identifies Mr. Musk as a technology engineer and entrepreneur—we need citations to reliable sources establishing "investor" as more or less coequal to those better known roles. NedFausa (talk) 19:41, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
 * What about adding it to his occupation list and mentioning it somewhere deeper in the entry? The concern as I understand it is that his investing history is now missing from the entry, not so much that the fact was previously stated in the lede. QRep2020 (talk) 21:40, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I re-added that content and sourced it. It borders on disingenuous and deceptive to merely say "Musk took an active role within the company" and imply that was closer to 2008, when Musk's involvement in Tesla literally began officially with him leading the first round of funding and joining the board in 2004. Nole  (<b style="font-family:courier; font-size:small">chat</b>·<b style="font-family:courier; font-size:small">edits</b>) 22:13, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
 * With today's restoration of material removed yesterday, the article now states that Musk led the Series A round of investment in Tesla in February 2004, and that ten years later he invested in AI firms DeepMind and Vicarious, explaining that the latter are "not from the standpoint of actually trying to make any investment return… I like to just keep an eye on what's going on with artificial intelligence." In January 2015, he donated $10 million to the nonprofit Future of Life Institute. According to Wikipedia, "An investor is a person that allocates capital with the expectation of a future financial return or to gain an advantage." (Emphasis added.) By that definition, Musk's AI and nonprofit contributions do not qualify him as an investor, leaving only his original Tesla investment 15 years ago. I submit that alone does not warrant adding "investor" alongside Entrepreneur/engineer/philanthropist in the Occupation parameter of our Infobox. NedFausa (talk) 01:45, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
 * This language closely follows that used by the Guardian source which describes the money he put into AI companies as "investments", even in the context of the "not in it for the money" quote. Our policies and guidelines support using what secondary sources say about the subject, even if it's not necessarily what the subject would say about himself. I'm not interested in wordsmithing based on the definition given by a Wikipedia article, however I'll note that Musk seems to be trying to gain some sort of advantage by "keeping an eye" on AI. –dlthewave ☎ 02:11, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I appreciate your work here, and I don't have strong feelings on the inclusion of "investor" here either way, but I do want to caution on the kind of analysis you're doing. We as editors aren't here to go over facts, apply definitions, and then decide what we think the best way to frame Musk is. That's original research and a synthesis of things that are not represented by the sources. Instead, we rely on what is said in independent sources. Additionally, Musk's comments about his reasons for putting funding into AI firms are not to be given as much weight in the context of the investor title. Yes, we can obviously use those comments as a source for the statement "Musk said that he bought into the firms to keep an eye on AI..." but nothing more. In this case, you applying what he said to a definition of investor is not the kind of policy-based arguments that will decide this for us--whether or not independent reliable sources call him an investor is what matters. Nole  (<b style="font-family:courier; font-size:small">chat</b>·<b style="font-family:courier; font-size:small">edits</b>)

I saw Musk's tweet within a couple minutes of him originally tweeting it and by the time I came here, most mentions of investing had been stripped from the lede. His twitter account is about as WP:PRIMARY as you can get, and I think we need to be extremely careful in using that as the guide for what happens on this page. I have a lot of concerns about Musk using WP as a platform for him to rebrand, and at the very least we should hold off on further removals of "investor" around the wiki until we come to some consensus about, per HaeB's comment, whether it's justified based on his current activities as listed in third-party sources. However, the fact that the subject of the article wants it to say a certain thing should not end the discussion, or even be terribly relevant. Nole (<b style="font-family:courier; font-size:small">chat</b>·<b style="font-family:courier; font-size:small">edits</b>) 17:33, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I strongly agree. It sets a bad precedent to take what some public figure says on Twitter wrt their wikipedia page at face value and edit based off of that. In this case Musk seems to be able to get away with it because the change isn't that substantial. But I could imagine a case where he would suggest an more substantial or questionable edit and the page would be flooded by fans of Musk trying to change the page, just because the primary source said to. I don't feel strongly either way about listing him as an investor, but it would be extremely disingenuous to not note that he has literally invested in companies.  dominiktesla   -talk- 02:54, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Let's evaluate whether it makes sense for Elon Musk to be called an investor independent of what Musk says. My personal opinion is that Elon Musk is not primarily known for being an investor: every single businessmen in tech has made investments; that's just the field. Based on all the sources that are available, it seems that Musk does not devote any significant portion of his time, or his wealth, towards investments. Thus, I do not think the 'investor' title is accurate. ☃ Unicodesnowman (talk) 03:00, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I agree! After reading a bit more about Musk, it seems that there are basically no sources that identify him specifically as an investor.  dominiktesla   -talk- 03:55, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
 * the article now recounts Musk's investments in 2004, 2014, and 2015, all supported by references to reliable sources. Does that suffice, or would you prefer additional changes to note how he has invested in companies? NedFausa (talk) 03:08, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks! That's good for me.  dominiktesla   -talk- 03:55, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Elon Musk requested adjustments to his Wikipedia page
This seems noteworthy, and maybe a flag that Elon directly influenced the content of this page:  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.180.189.119 (talk) 18:36, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I never realised that this article was maintained by a "legion of fans and followers." Martinevans123 (talk) 18:39, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
 * It's fair to say that Elon directly influenced the content of this page. As far as I can see, that's not a bad thing, and the page is better as a result. NedFausa (talk) 18:42, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

His description
I wanna change his description to “ inventor, engineer, and industrialist”, Jojo1478 (talk) 14:08, 29 December 2019 (UTC)


 * What exactly has he invented? QRep2020 (talk) 15:35, 29 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Those little tiny clothes-hanger thingies you sometimes get with expensive socks. Also, bumble bees. 104.35.125.199 (talk) 09:48, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Memes
Elon Musk has been the "father" to many memes in his days. starting with Elon smoking Weed during a podcast. his next meme was, "Elon, host meme review" which he has come to do once. during that review, he created another meme. in this meme, he was laughing at a deer that had drowned. His iconic laugh instantly turned into a meme. His most overlooked meme though is 100% the Elon Crust meme. This meme, partnered by Bread Sheeren and Vladmir Gluten, was his least liked meme. The most resent meme from Elon was the Cyber Truck. The Cyber Truck meme comes from the "failed" sales pitch of the newest Tesla model, the Cyber Truck. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.226.181.162 (talk) 20:12, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 January 2020
He says himself that he is the "business magnet" then write: (elon musk the business magnet) Antiqueties (talk) 11:45, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
 * ❌. I think you might mean "magnate" not "magnet"? But the question is already posted and answered at the top of this page. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:48, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

apparent erroneous edit - I'm a newbie and don't know what to do :(
Today the entire article was replaced by "Do I know you?" MalkieM (talk) 23:47, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , Fixed. Someone went in and vandalized the page.
 * If you see something like this in the future, click on the "View History" tab, and undo the edit that removed it all (You can check if the edit did the removing in two ways: the little red/green number, if it's red and very large it's probably a section/page blank, and the "prev" button, which compares an edit with the previous edit, showing what it added or removed.) moonythedwarf (Braden N.) 23:53, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 January 2020
Add to "Awards and Recognition": On January 23, 2020, Donald J. Trump, 45th President of the United States, praised Musk stating that he "does good at rockets". https://www.cnn.com/videos/business/2020/01/23/trump-elon-musk-davos-orig.cnn-business Mshelbym (talk) 05:58, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. Getting a compliment from the President is a bit too trivial to warrant inclusion in the article, imho (especially a one-off compliment like that). OhKayeSierra (talk) 16:45, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Possible new additions
Elon recently stated in this interview around 17:00 that he originally wanted to work at a particle accelerator until the US government cancelled its newest collider. He stated that it made him reconsider working on a collider after realizing that it can be cancelled at any time by the government.

At 21 minutes he discusses his experience on the early internet, where he states he was only early to the internet because it was normal in the physics community, and states that it was almost all basic text at the time.

At 22 minutes he states he is not interested in genetically engineering humans.

At 28 minutes he states he previously wanted to use x86 computer chip manufacturing tech to manufacture capacitors at precisions far beyond existing tech. As capacitor density relies on area and space between plates, using chip manufacturing tech would have theoretically greatly improved energy density. He states that it has now become unnecessary.

Around 35 minutes he states that he chose China for the first foreign factory because it was the center of electric car production, and also the tariffs causing a situation where they could not sell in China if they did not produce locally. He also states there is a lot of talent and drive in China which makes it a good place to do business, and that the quality of cars being produced is very high.

These may be interesting statements to add in their respective sections, but the article is locked to non registered users. Feel free to add them yourselves. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.141.33.19 (talk) 18:22, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Number of children
The Forbes article says 5. Why does our article say 6? — Preceding unsigned comment added by WeyerStudentOfAgrippa (talk • contribs) 19:14, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Its likely either referring to a miscarriage his first wife had, or referring to rumours that Grimes is pregnant. Grimes pregnancy has not been confirmed, and shes posted photoshopped images of herself pregnant in the past. So its not for certain yet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.141.33.19 (talk) 19:35, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Singer-songwriter?
He has 2 songs now, and he wrote both. Should we officially classify him as a 'singer-songwriter' or no? Sneakycrown (talk) 12:40, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

He has since released several fully-produced musical pieces on his soundcloud. HeerMeMoo (talk) 13:34, 31 January 2020 (UTC)


 * I suspect that two, or even several, self-published songs (however good they might be) are not sufficient to "officially classify him as a 'singer-songwriter'". Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:45, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/elon-musk-adds-edm-artist-162230083.html

Please see this article. +1 to add EDM Artist B.Valley (talk) 02:39, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Grimes is Pregnant? Elons
Can we find and confirm if the woman Elon is dating Grimesis pregnant with next child?

Few leads:
 * https://gizmodo.com/is-grimes-pregnant-and-should-we-blog-it-nsfw-1840885045
 * https://www.stereogum.com/2069342/grimes-announces-pregnancy/news/
 * https://www.businessinsider.com/grimes-elon-musk-pregnant-instagram-post-indicates-2020-1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.112.177.218 (talk) 23:07, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

All these leads are not from accredited sources, can they be denied or removed? Interstellar20 (talk) 01:07, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 February 2020
Elon stated on Joe Rogan that he wanted his Wikipedia to say, business magnate 31.205.208.15 (talk) 03:24, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
 * This violates WP:AUTOBIO. If we take his direction at what to put on his article then we're not really taking a neutral un-biased point of view. -- Yarnalgo  talk to me 05:52, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Minor grammatical errors
"In 1994, Musk held two internships in Silicon Valley during the summer: at an energy storage start-up called Pinnacle Research Institute which researched electrolytic ultracapacitors for energy storage; and at the Palo Alto-based start-up Rocket Science Games.[50]" - incorrect semi-colon use. Could correct to: "In 1994, Musk held two internships in Silicon Valley during the summer: at an energy storage start-up called Pinnacle Research Institute, which researched electrolytic ultracapacitors for energy storage, and at the Palo Alto-based start-up Rocket Science Games.[50]"

"Bruce Leak, the former lead engineer behind Apple’s QuickTime who had hired Musk noted ..." - missing comma to close the appositive. Could correct to: "Bruce Leak, the former lead engineer behind Apple’s QuickTime who had hired Musk, noted ..." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.131.99.98 (talk) 18:28, 2 February 2020 (UTC)


 * In the future use Elon Musk to flag a requested edit. -- Yarnalgo  talk to me 05:57, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Removed Illness Section in Personal Life
I invoked WP:BOLD and removed this section on Musk contracting malaria. With YouTube as a self-published source of user-generated content, I felt it inappropriate to include it in a BLP without additional sources for it. No objections if someone readds the section, if there are additional sources to go with it. I'll have to re-read my copy of Musk's biography to know for sure, but I honestly don't recall malaria ever being mentioned in it. OhKayeSierra (talk) 09:19, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
 * So I double checked my copy of Musk's biography, and unfortunately, I couldn't find any mention of malaria in it. If there's any reliable sources to support the claim, please feel free to revert me. But, unfortunately, I haven't been able to find much myself. OhKayeSierra (talk) 14:38, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I think we should all be happy he didn't contract malaria. But did you see e.g. this and this? Martinevans123 (talk) 14:46, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Regardless of sourcing, the mere statement that Musk once contracted malaria is definitely not notable without wider context. And even in the wider "why Musk never takes vacation" context of those two links, I'm not convinced that it is anything more than trivia. Rosbif73 (talk) 15:55, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Tend to agree. Might get a mention if it killed him, I guess. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:16, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
 * It's completely irrelevant. User:Back ache, please do not restore the disputed material without a talk page consensus to do so, cheers. (Talking of irrelevant, it doesn't even mention a near-death experience?) ——  SN  54129  09:49, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Actually, reading that book source, it does sound quite serious. He had the worse strain "falciparum malaria". It says he was rushed to hospital and specifically: "Doctors there misdiagnosed and mistreated his condition to the point that Musk was near death." The description of the incident is quite detailed. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:50, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
 * In which case, way for our article to manage to strip outof all sense of importance or relevance! It managed too reduce what you just said there to "He caught malaria": when I said irrelevant, I meant to our article, not to him. As he is clearly allowed to give theepisode more WP:WEIGHT than us:) ——  SN  54129  11:07, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
 * OhKayeSierra I added a reference to specific section of Askley Vances book but it was still removed, I do think near-death experiences is a big enough life event to help you understand someone, but I will respect the consensus that if it doesn't kill him, its not interesting Back ache (talk) 11:04, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
 * The mere statement "Musk contracted malaria" is not in itself a useful addition to his biography. Too little detail makes it worthless. But with appropriate sources to back a slightly more detailed explanation of the effect that this had on Musk, it could potentially be worth including. Rosbif73 (talk) 11:33, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Then you reduced a bit too much. He was near death, i.e. it nearly killed him. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:18, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Martinevans123 According to Musk, his mother and brother (in the video) and Ashley Vance (in the book) he got pretty close, it doesn't matter though, I am a bit exhausted by this tbh Back ache (talk) 11:36, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Maybe we should call an ambulance! We all know Wikipedia should carry a health warning. Especially for editors with a name like yours? Martinevans123 (talk) 11:43, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

A well documented near death experience hardly seems irrelevant. Benjamin (talk) 05:16, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
 * The essence of WP:NOR is that editors should not decide what is significant. If Musk had a near death experience, and if that had any effect worth noting, a reliable source would have noted it (the effect, not whether the illness occurred). Johnuniq (talk) 05:59, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I think the sources are sufficient. Benjamin (talk) 07:18, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Which source noted which effect? Johnuniq (talk) 08:35, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Is it required that the sources discuss the effect? Benjamin (talk) 08:59, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, they must discuss it directly, otherwise it would be WP:OR (or WP:SYN) to mention it. Rosbif73 (talk) 09:39, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Why do we necessarily have to mention the effect? Why can't we just say that it almost killed him? That seems like it should be significant enough on its own. Benjamin (talk) 09:42, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
 * If a reliable source says he nearly died, then it is of course possible to say so in wikipedia without it being OR. But I'm not convinced that a simple statement along the lines of "Musk nearly died in (whatever year it was) after contracting malaria" is significant enough to warrant inclusion if we don't have sourced discussion of how he was affected. Rosbif73 (talk) 09:49, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Bust window
See https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/nov/22/elon-musk-net-worth-tesla-cybertruck.
 * The performance with the bust windows reduced the share price by 6%, as did the hashish smoking. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.143.16.223 (talk)

Please remove Grimes entirely from Elon's page
On May 7, 2018, Musk and Canadian musician Grimes revealed that they had begun dating.[343][344][345] On January 8, 2020, Grimes announced she was pregnant. The baby's father is assumed to be Musk, although this was not announced.[346][347]

Please remove this paragraph. Grimes has never been his girlfriend from the start and she is 100% not pregnant. Please see thetruthseeker.club or boycottgrimes on twitter for a lot of evidence of both of these things. Elon would ask himself if he wasn't being blackmailed by that awful thing. His PR person even confirmed that the Met "date" was only supposed to be a PR stunt that went very wrong and he was very mad about it. Seriously look at Boycottgrimes on YouTube for the video... He will ask you himself to remove all mention of that thing as soon as the 420 trial is over. She is not, nor ever was his girlfriend. Just an abusive, blackmailing, roofying grifter who demands he pays her large amounts of money every month. seriously! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.35.109.38 (talk) 05:27, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Grimes has since confirmed she is indeed pregnant with Musks's child. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LoganBlade (talk • contribs) 05:34, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Second this motion. Interstellar20 (talk) 01:05, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Elon and Grimes - once again
I don't intend to participate in a editing war or anything of that kind, but I must say, there seems to be some truth to the claims that Elon and Grimes are not together, as expressed by the user Interstellar20 (now blocked). Since there is no official information, I get why some are opposed to changing the partner section as per Wiki rules. However, there is also no official indication that they are together, coming from both Elon and Grimes (there are only articles citing Grimes, Elon never mentions it). As of yesterday, he is no longer following her on Twitter and there is mounting evidence that she is faking the pregnancy. Since Wikipedia is not a tabloid, in my opinion it would be best to just remove the information regarding Elon and Grimes and wait until there is some actual, verifiable and trusted source. Czarek11 (talk) 01:42, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Until a reliable third party account reports of a split, we go by the existing sources indicating they are together. Wikipedia articles are not based on who follows who on Twitter. That's not a source. NJZombie (talk) 01:48, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I do not object to the pure removal of challenged information, even if such challenging is only based on the lack of recent reliable confirmation of the earlier statements of previously-reliable, but now possibly outdated, sources. However, Interstellar20 did much more than that, in a way that – when looking at their complete contribution history and searching the web for confirmation – appears to be only describable as the creation of hoaxes. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:09, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Even if it were true that the two are no longer a couple, which I have zero emotional investment in, it's still sourced information about a relationship that did happen and is documented as such.NJZombie (talk) 18:15, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Sure – I think the main concern here is whether the infobox should display it as currently active. However, vague guesses based on social media interaction are unsuitable to be factored into this decision. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:27, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Right. I just sent you a direct message. NJZombie (talk) 18:30, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 31 March 2020
In The Joe Rogan Experience episode 1169, at 10:13, Mr. Musk notes that his Wikipedia describes him as a "business magnate." When questioned what he would describe himself as, (10:16) he says "A business magnet. Can someone please change my Wikipedia page to magnet?"

I am requesting (along with Mr. Musk himself), in the first paragraph where it is stated Mr. Musk is an engineer, industrial designer, and technology entrepreneur, that business magnet be added to his description. YaboijackPK (talk) 04:22, 31 March 2020 (UTC)


 * ❌ Not sure if you know, but on Wikipedia we go by WP:RELIABLESOURCES. Musk can describe himself any way he likes, but if there are no reliable sources calling him that, then he cannot be described as such, at least not in Wikipedia's voice. Dr.   K.  04:33, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Tesla Stock values fall April 30th- May 1st 2020
https://fortune.com/2020/05/01/tesla-shares-tumble-after-ceo-elon-musks-odd-tweet-storm/

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-tesla-stocks-musk/tesla-tumbles-after-musk-tweets-stock-too-high-idUSKBN22D5V7

SOme of the news outlets try to tie Elon Musk to rants he made over California's shelter in Place orders when that took place.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/04/29/coronavirus-elon-musk-says-its-time-to-free-america-now-from-lockdowns/

Right now Elon is being played as a loose cannon figure in his rants. 2601:640:C600:3C20:D457:1003:C6EC:FFAE (talk) 20:23, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

https://www.thedailybeast.com/daily-show-host-trevor-noah-goes-off-on-elon-musk-for-insane-lockdown-rant

https://www.vox.com/recode/2020/5/1/21244346/elon-musk-tesla-twitter-stock-price-coronavirus-grimes https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-04-30/musk-s-shutdown-rant-mocked-by-cuban-embraced-by-conservatives

Should this be in a section on his views, under a new bit about coronavirus? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iamthinking2202 (talk • contribs) 02:34, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Purpose of the quote in the Education section?
What is the purpose of the random quote in the Education section? It's completely unrelated. It should be removed. BeŻet (talk) 17:28, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

I've now removed it. If anyone can justify its inclusion, please explain it here. Thanks. BeŻet (talk) 11:53, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

what's the point of this quote? It doesn't belong here. This is Wikipedia, not an Elon fan page. BeŻet (talk) 21:19, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

The purpose of the quote is to give insight into the problem solving approach Musk uses for both spacex and tesla. The citation was incorrect and has now been corrected- it is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTZNZOf17N4&feature=youtu.be&t=1175 . It was placed in the education section because of the link to the physics background, but could be relocated to the spacex section where has the most direct relevance. I am not sure why you consider that a "fan page" link- it is a useful quote that provides additional insight into the subject. Axiarchist (talk) 05:09, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Because it's a vapid, trivial utterance of no real importance. There's a place for these at Wikiquote, not here. If you really want, you could mention in the article that Musk says he "boils things down to their fundamental truths and reasons up from there", which sounds a bit douchey and would probably be rejected by other editors, but including such quote in such a manner is rather pointless. BeŻet (talk) 16:54, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Introductory Sentence is Misleading
The introductory sentence to this article states, "Elon Reeve Musk FRS (/ˈiːlɒn/; born June 28, 1971) is an engineer, industrial designer, technology entrepreneur, and philanthropist." The page for "Engineer" linked in this article states in its opening paragraph that "The foundational qualifications of an engineer typically include a four-year bachelor's degree in an engineering discipline, or in some jurisdictions, a master's degree in an engineering discipline plus four to six years of peer-reviewed professional practice (culminating in a project report or thesis) and passage of engineering board examinations." Elon Musk does not possess any of these qualifications, and given the description of his role within his company from sources 2, 3, and 4 of the article, the existing label in the opening sentence of "industrial designer" seems sufficient to describe his involvement. Describing Elon Musk as an engineer is misleading in that it implies that he has qualifications and education which in reality, he does not possess.

It is true that Musk describes himself as an engineer, however, as evidenced by the "Business Magnet" discussion on this talk page, that is not sufficient reason to include such a title in this article. It is my opinion that the word "engineer" in the opening sentence should be removed, resulting in the following: "Elon Reeve Musk FRS (/ˈiːlɒn/; born June 28, 1971) is an industrial designer, technology entrepreneur, and philanthropist."

NotOnTheSteel (talk) 22:36, 18 April 2020 (UTC)


 * No, it is not misleading. The information that he is an engineer is not something that has to be established in some objective sense. Rather there has to be (and indeed is) a reliable source as source for the information. Lklundin (talk) 13:48, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Is to be an engineer to possess some property that is in Nature such as angular momentum? That's absurd; one is an engineer if a group of others or an institution ascribes the title to the person. The source provided is an archived profile from ASME.org which states the following: While Mr. Musk does not have an engineering degree per say (sic), he holds degrees in Physics and Economics from the University of Pennsylvania, few dispute his assertion, in response to his focus on technical details as CEO of Tesla and Space X, "I'm an engineer, so what I do is engineering. That's what I'm good at.
 * That strikes me as a strange thing for a reliable source to disclose, especially if it also used against someone disputing whether Musk is an engineer or not. Firstly, it admits that he doesn't have a degree in engineering, so that removes institutional ascription. Secondly, it doesn't provide any evidence of some poll or survey conducted to determine if engineers or even laymen think of Musk as an engineer (i.e. ascription by group of others); it simply asserts that "few" dispute it. Does the number of those who dispute it matter? No, one should suffice. This leaves the argument with little strict recourse and therefore leads one to doubt how reliable it actually is.
 * However, the archived article also later describes him as a "practical engineer", which is admittedly ambiguous but also provides a clue as to what the article is attempting to do with regards to Musk's status. All that is needed is some further analysis. Now, is the article referring to him as one with a degree in practical eng          ineering? Probably not, because the article already pointed out that Musk doesn't have an engineering degrees and reliable sources don't deal in contradictions. Therefore, unless we allow that the source contains false information, it must mean that Musk is to be considered an engineer in some loose sense of the term, as in an engineer in practice.
 * Given this analysis of the source material, I recommend the first line be changed to reflect this looser qualification: Musk is an engineer insofar as he's an engineer in practice. IanCappelletti (talk) 20:39, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
 * If you agree that the source confirms he's an engineer in practice, then where's the problem? Also, bear in mind that is not "some loose sense of the term", it is the sense of the term widely used around the world. Sure, a few jurisdictions restrict the practice of certain "engineering" tasks to people with a formal qualification in the subject, but many others do not. Rosbif73 (talk) 08:11, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Because 'engineer' is different from 'engineer in practice'; the article doesn't reflect that distinction and Wikipedia is in the business of trying to make things that verified by other sources put clearly. And are you sure yours is the sense of the term used widely around the world? Do you have anything that speaks to that conclusion? And even if there are different senses of 'engineer' in different parts of the world, shouldn't more care be taken to reflect in the writing how and by what local criteria Elon Musk is to be considered an engineer so as to overcome confusion? Or, we could just say he is an engineer in practice, which I don't believe anyone doubts and would "work" in any part of the world. IanCappelletti (talk) 20:44, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Where does this leave us? Would anyone object to NotOnTheSteel changing the language from "engineer" to "engineer in practice"? IanCappelletti (talk) 17:13, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
 * As an engineer, I object to this change. Firstly, in some places 'engineer' is not protected, so anyone can call themselves (or others) engineer. Further, any actual engineer is per se an "engineer in practice", so the change is confusing and unhelpful and outright pedantic. Lklundin (talk) 17:20, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
 * It can be argued that being an engineer does not require an engineering degree, just that you do engineering work. From a personal point I would argue that he is not actually an engineer and much less an industrial designer. He _supervised_ engineering projects and _critiqued_ industrial design. However, good luck challenging that here... I pass. I’d say “business magnate" would actually more apt (plus, Steve Jobs got that description, which may be why Musk wants it... Averell (talk) 06:17, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree. As I pointed out above, even the source material defers to some strange standard of "no one denying it". What engineering work has Elon Musk performed and then credited for? IanCappelletti (talk) 06:04, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I am very unsure that this is a relevant discussion. But Elon Musk has personally been a driving force of the engineering in SpaceX. For example, his realization that he should calculate the price of the raw materials needed to build a rocket and compare that to the about 30 times higher selling price of a commercially available rocket and that consequently SpaceX should build their own rockets is a prime example of engineering work. When Wernher von Braun was building his first rocket that went to space there had been the exact same discussions, the needed amount of steel and potatoes (for distilling the alcohol that the V2 burned) which were both sorely needed for more Earthly tasks. However, while highly interesting this is a digression and in relation to the article and therefore indeed to this discussion any reasoning based on such discussions would be WP:OR. Lastly to : Your musings over whatever description Musk would want clearly falls under WP:NOTAFORUM. Lklundin (talk) 07:45, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I had not heard of that story before! Huh -- prima facie, that sounds like good ole fashioned engineering to me. But on second thought, with taking in Averell23's réplique once more, I now have Mr. Musk in the example qua project budgetary manager. Well, allow me to give the dispute some further thought in the coming days. 🤗 IanCappelletti (talk) 08:54, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
 * When the "engineer" label is applied, most would assume that means one has a college degree in engineering. And if so, what kind of engineering?  Electrical, chemical, mechanical, Ærospace...? Guess just fill in the blank with one's own imagination.  Perhaps he mastered __ engineering using Professor Harold Hill's Think Method.  The current designation is misleading and is little more than a Kentucky Colonel designation bestowed upon someone for the purpose of bolstering social standing.  Maybe "lay engineer" or "amateur engineer" something along those lines? RRskaReb  talk 01:05, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Elon Musk does not posess an engineering degree and hence cannot be called an engineer. Laws in the US prohibit someone officially calling him/herself an engineer unless the person has an engineering degree or licensing if applicable as evidenced by the reference attached. The article also details historical reasons for why such a legislation was introduced - to prevent people without formal training to be able to work on public projects. A side note to say that he calls himself an engineer can be added if necessary. Reference - https://web.archive.org/web/20170716193510/https://www.nspe.org/sites/default/files/resources/pdfs/pemagazine/june2007_the_professional_engineering.pdf NeuronalBurst (talk) 12:03, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
 * The logic directly above is incorrect. State-specific laws to the contrary, Wikipedia can use the term Engineer (not necessarily a licensed one) about Elon Musk when a reliable source does that. As the article is currently doing. To the two most recent posters, please see WP:REPEAT. Lklundin (talk) 14:41, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

X Æ A-12 / kyle
his newborn son, X Æ A-12, born on May 4th 2020 his name has been classified as "too complicated" on twitter. his new name is kyle. thank u for coming to my ted talk xoxo Clara.hehe (talk) 14:53, 8 May 2020 (UTC) a person with more common sense to name their kid R2D2's and C-3PO's cousin

Not a scientist
I challenge the claim that he's a scientist, which he is not. None of the given sources claim that he is a scientist. Tslawrk (talk) 11:36, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Tend to agree. None of those three sources in the lead have the word "scientist". There's a Q&A discussion at Quora here. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:01, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

I can't see or find anything that says he is a scientist either. I removed it but it was replaced and for my sins I got called a reddit vandal, which I can assure you I am not. Govindaharihari (talk) 13:56, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, it seems like there might be some POV editing on this article by some users who are fans of Elon Musk. Tslawrk (talk) 14:33, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't quite see how everyone who takes an undergraduate course physics is necessarily "a scientist". Martinevans123 (talk) 07:12, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

May I redirect to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method and how musk uses it in his day to day at Tesla and SpaceX. Thus is a scientist. Also holds physics degree. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LoganBlade (talk • contribs) 11:39, 11 May 2020 (UTC)


 * If you want to describe Musk as a "scientist" you need to provide a reliable source that uses that word. It's a simple as that. Although using just one single source might be pushing it. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:42, 11 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Not only is Musk not a scientist, his dangerous lies about COVID-19 has proven that he's a science-denier. 46.97.170.78 (talk) 06:13, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 May 2020
I propose you remove the claim that he is a scientist from the introduction, per my comment in the section above this one. To summarize: none of the stated sources claim that he is a scientist. Tslawrk (talk) 11:38, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

✅ Rosbif73 (talk) 14:00, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Possible case of non-neutral editing?
I feel like edits like this one aren't contributing to the neutrality of the article. This edit removed information backed by secondary sources, and replaced it with other information from a primary source which requires a person to provide their name and email to access it. The contributor of this particular edit also keeps re-adding the claim that Musk is a scientist, although (see previous discussions above) no source for this claim has been provided. --Tslawrk (talk) 10:34, 11 May 2020 (UTC)


 * I tend to agree that the edit was not an improvement. The editor in question is a new editor who may not be familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. So we have to allow some degree of forbearance, I think. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:49, 11 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Yes, as a new user myself, I agree. The editor in question probably has good intentions, they may just be unaware of some policies. Tslawrk (talk) 12:31, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Stanford
The article says this:
 * "In 1995, Musk commenced a PhD in energy physics/materials science at Stanford University in California. Eager to pursue opportunities in the Internet boom, however, he dropped out after just two days to launch his first company, Zip2 Corporation."

Both sources support the claim regarding Stanford. Furthermore, Encyclopedia Britannica here says: "He enrolled in graduate school in physics at Stanford University in California, but he left after only two days because he felt that the Internet had much more potential to change society than work in physics." This is supported by: ecorner.stanford.eud, businessinsider, money.com and cnbc, amongst others. Are these sources all wrong? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:01, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
 * No need to dignify the below nonsense with an answer. Lklundin (talk) 18:00, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Both sources do not cite a source--theybare unverified; see wp:verify

Please remove the content. Granite07 (talk) 17:40, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

I can post a half dozen sources that say the earth is flat... "Are these sources all wrong? Thanks" Granite07 (talk) 17:43, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

The Mine of Musk
Rebuttal of a claim doesn't give more validity to the claim, hence the rationale for reverting my edit here: is invalid as far as I can see. This is a biography of a living person on Wikipedia, not a gallery hall for claims without real backing like a news channel or a YouTube documentary or something. By analogy, there is no evidence that Glenn Beck raped and murdered a woman in 1990, and his formal complaint against the people claiming it is true doesn't somehow add to the evidence that he did that. Geographyinitiative (talk) 08:57, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
 * This edit doesn't help your case at all, it just lays bare the fact that we are slapping wild internet claims that the person has denounced into a living person's bio Geographyinitiative (talk) 09:00, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I have permanently removed the emerald mine information from this biography of a living person. The source cited says that Errol Musk didn't even remember where he was when he bought the emerald mine, allegedly saying "I think we were in Djibouti." when they purchased the stake.  If you get a CNN or Snopes page or something solid that really supports this claim, then that's different- but what you're giving me is an article from a person that perennially makes wild claims about Musk including that 'teenage Elon Musk once casually sold his father's emeralds to Tiffany & Co. while his dad was sleeping'. NONSENSE. If you want to put this back in the article, you should put it in the right place chronologically too: this "allegedly happened" in the mid-1980s, which should probably not be before the paragraph about the man's childhood. Again, NONSENSE. Geographyinitiative (talk) 09:56, 20 May 2020 (UTC)


 * The key question (per WP:BLPSOURCES) is whether we believe that the claim's source is reliable and/or whether any other sources corroborate the claim. Musk's rebuttal is a secondary consideration. Rosbif73 (talk) 10:19, 20 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Thanks for all the WP:AGF and collaborative effort here, Geographyinitiative. I don't even like emeralds. I wholly agree with you, Rosbif73. I only re-added it as I assumed Business Insider is a WP:RS. But apparently, it's just.... NONSENSE. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:59, 20 May 2020 (UTC) p.s. I also believe the chronological placement was correct, as it's about his upbringing. If this had been an agreed true fact, it should certainly be placed there. If it had caused a huge controversy in 2018, it should have appeared chronologically to reflect that timing. This seems to be something in between.
 * If there's a reliable source for this, let's see it. Otherwise, this is really worse than nonsense- it's clickbait used in the bio of a living person. Geographyinitiative (talk) 11:05, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I might agree with you if Musk had just ignored it. I actually think his response was the more informative part of this topic. But then it seems what I might say is all NONSENSE. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:08, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
 * If only Glenn Beck hadn't made a formal complaint, then I wouldn't have believed that he raped and murdered a woman in 1990. Geographyinitiative (talk) 11:30, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I really don't see the relevance of Glenn Beck to Elon Musk. Such an analogy, if that's what it is, seems somewhat misplaced, if not wholly hyperbolic. Your personal beliefs, about what you may or may not read in the media, are your own concern. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:35, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
 * When you have more info on that emerald mine, lemme know. Geographyinitiative (talk) 11:46, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Why should I ever have any? I think we both agree it's a fiction. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:48, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Musk's response may be an example of the Streisand effect. But in any case we shouldn't be taking his denial into account in deciding whether to include the claim or not. Rosbif73 (talk) 12:03, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I am sorry that I upset you and potentially other members of the community, but I was trying to do my level best to keep Wikipedia in good shape. Some of the lies that get posted here become believed in the real world, and then you can cite the lie-believers to back up spurious claims (for instance: various insane claims about Chinese langauges and the Voynich manuscript were posted in 2004 and they have spread to the four corners of the Internet; Unsourced claims about 'In God We Trust' became "sourced") Like I said, NONSENSE Geographyinitiative (talk) 12:04, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I think you ought to think twice before seemingly branding me an advocate of posting lies. I suspect many people will read that Business Insider piece on line (or even just read the headline) and wonder if it's true. Wikipedia would do them a favour by showing Musk's rebuttal. But I'm not trying to WP:Right great wrongs. I still think his reply was informative. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:10, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I am really at a loss for words. No known emerald mines. Thanks for your time. Geographyinitiative (talk) 12:22, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Unlike you to be at a loss for words. I bet he's got a few emeralds about the place. After all, he does love a nice ring. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:46, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I bet he does have emeralds, we can agree on that. I'm sorry for antagonizing you like this. All I can see is a biography of a living person that must be kept to Wikipedia standard on the one hand and a wild internet claim on the other. Geographyinitiative (talk) 12:50, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but I'm beginning to feel a little haggard by this ride... Martinevans123 (talk) 12:54, 20 May 2020 (UTC)


 * There does not have to be a WP:RS for the emerald mine. The fact that there is a RS for the 'claim of an emerald mine' - and a rebuttal from Musk is enough to make it notable. It helps to demonstrate the at times puzzling claims that (presumably) detractors of Musk put out there, and as such it adds value to the article. (If in fact Elon Musk had benefited financially due to this claim, I am sure we would learn the details about it - and that as such, it is very likely all bogus - but that's beside the point, whether we like the story or not.). Lklundin (talk) 12:38, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Alright, now, in this case, what is the reliable source (RS) that makes a 'claim of an emerald mine'? Geographyinitiative (talk) 12:43, 20 May 2020 (UTC) (modified)
 * You will have to excuse me, but the validity of my argument does not depend on whether I can produce such an example. What I am doing, is to refute your argument that we need a RS on the emerald mine. Lklundin (talk) 12:53, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
 * You wrote, "The fact that there is a RS for the 'claim of an emerald mine' - and a rebuttal from Musk is enough to make it notable." What I'm saying is that the "fact that there is a RS for the 'claim of an emerald mine'" has not yet been established. Geographyinitiative (talk) 12:56, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I would like to say that I really don't understand what has happened in this conversation. It seems very strange to me. I didn't mean to cause offense. Sorry to all involved. Geographyinitiative (talk) 13:02, 20 May 2020 (UTC)


 * There is a source stating that Errol Musk said he owned an emerald mine. First question: is it a reliable source? WP:RS/Perennial sources states that there is no overall consensus as to its reliability... Second question: are there other RS making the same claim? (I don't know, I haven't had time to look) Rosbif73 (talk) 13:15, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
 * And that's not all his father Errol has said allegedly (same source, of course): "We had so much money at times we couldn't even close our safe." Hmmm. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:22, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
 * If nobody puts in the leg work to find reliable sources to show there is a claim of emerald mines, then this whole discussion is over because you can't add stuff to the biography of a living person wildly. That's all I'm asking for here: sources for the 'claim of an emerald mine'. If you all find it, great. If not, then you didn't find it: discussion over. The Business Insider articles  are not New York Times level material people. Geographyinitiative (talk) 13:26, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Also, let's make sure to note in the event Mr. Phillip de Wet really did interview Errol Musk that the relationship between Elon and Errol is very tense seeing that Elon has called his father "a terrible human being". Who knows what's going on there people. Has anyone beside Errol been quoted talking about the half share of the Zambian emerald mine? Geographyinitiative (talk) 13:33, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Discussion over?! Let's not forget about the Italians who paid £80,000 in cash for a plane Errol was intending to fly to England to sell when it landed, but couldn't fly via Jeddah, because there was a religious holiday.... Martinevans123 (talk) 13:42, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I wasn't clear what was going on there. Geographyinitiative (talk) 13:48, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Elon Musk is not a reliable source of information about Elon Musk. BeŻet (talk) 13:53, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
 * How about his Dad? Martinevans123 (talk) 13:55, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
 * We can report what both are saying about the mine, but what I'm trying to say is that Elon rebutting something doesn't make it defenitely not true. BeŻet (talk) 14:18, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Based on the odd twists in the narrative presented by the Business Insider articles as pointed out by Martinevans123, I do not believe the quotations in the Business Insider articles are genuine Errol Musk quotes. Geographyinitiative (talk) 14:25, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Well, you're entitled to such opinion, but since you have no evidence it doesn't matter here. BeŻet (talk) 11:12, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Emeralds might make the news
Okay, it's been a few days. The conversation here got a little wild, huh? Well, after a few days, I think I'm still quite firmly in the camp that none of the emerald stuff should appear on the Elon Musk page itself (could be included on conspiracy theory pages) without further confirmation, 1) about the specific nature of the emerald mine claims and 2) about the direct relevance said emerald mine claims to Mr. Elon Musk. Here are some new points I've come up with: Note that hyperlink in the quotation I provide here is also seen in the article proper. The hyperlink in that quote goes to a Thursday, February 22, 2018 02:48 PM article from Mr. Phillip de Wet (, archived ) in which Mr. Errol Musk is said to describe wildly implausible incidents set in late 1980's New York City concerning young Mr. Elon Musk, Mr. Kimbal Musk and Tiffany's, an American luxury jewelry and specialty retailer. In Mr. Phillip de Wet's own words from the second to last sentence of the Thursday, February 22, 2018 02:48 PM article, and I quote: ""BI SA reached out to Elon for confirmation of the tale, but he did not respond."" Use of the word 'tale' to refer to a story which is on its face totally impossible shows that Mr. Phillip de Wet himself (or his editors) are having some degree of trouble accepting the validity of Mr. Errol Musk's alleged claims. They published a 'tale', and there is no claim that this is vetted, factual information usable in a Wikipedia article. For Mr. Phillip de Wet to link his Wednesday, February 28, 2018 06:30 AM article to the 'tale' (the Thursday, February 22, 2018 02:48 PM article) shows that there is some level of connection between the two articles, and I would argue that the factual validity of the two articles is inextricably linked, being published in quick succession, about five and a half days apart. The Thursday, February 22, 2018 02:48 PM article shows that the source of quotations from Mr. Errol Musk include wild fantasies about impossible events and, by association, the Wednesday, February 28, 2018 06:30 AM article is thereby put into at least some level of doubt. We are asked to imagine a safe filled so full of crumpled bills that they pour out of the safe, similar to the one appearing in the music video "Iggy Azalea - Kream ft. Tyga" at 0:04, 0:36, 0:44, 0:48, 0:52, 1:27, 2:32 etc. This type of situation is a common literary device symbolizing prosperity and wealth which is used to great effect in the music video. However, an actual safe with crumpled and disorderly bills would to me signify minor success within a context of overall financial poverty- as I would understand things, the safe of a rich person is orderly and the money is grouped into stacks (as will be seen below in the case of the Italians and their safe). I suspect that the mechanism by which one person would be "holding the money in place" while another would "slam the door" of the safe was so wildly implausible, even to Mr. Phillip de Wet, that he omitted the direct quotation he could have used at this point (if the story is not fabricated). A single-engine plane can apparently cost $15,000 to $100,000 in modern-day USD, and a multi-engine plane can be purchased for between $75,000 and $300,000 according to the article 'Economics of Owning a Small Plane' on Investopedia. Therefore, I think that the £80,000 figure is actually plausible as the price for the small plane. Now here's the crux of the issue: what if I were a swindler that wanted to get a plane cheap? I might tell the seller that I have an emerald mine that I wanted to sell a half-share in for half the cost of the plane. If the mark fell for the deal, I might send the mark a few emeralds for the next six years and then tell him the mine went out of business for some reason. Because, my friends, I do not yet have the ability to accept that half ownership in an emerald mine can be purchased for £40,000.
 * The last sentence of the Wednesday, February 28, 2018 06:30 AM article from Mr. Phillip de Wet (, archived ) reads, and I quote: ""And, on at least one occasion, his [Mr. Errol Musk's] now famous son [Mr. Elon Musk] also took his hand [meaning: tried his hand] at dealing in the gems, with peculiar results." (My clarifications in italics)"
 * The Thursday, February 22, 2018 02:48 PM article also says, and I quote: ""“We were very wealthy,” says Errol. “We had so much money at times we couldn't even close our safe.” With one person holding the money in place, another other would slam the door. “And then there'd still be all these notes sticking out and we'd sort of pull them out and put them in our pockets.”""
 * What exactly was it that was supposedly purchased by Mr. Errol Musk? According to the Wednesday, February 28, 2018 06:30 AM article from Mr. Phillip de Wet, and I quote: "There, the two South Africans [Mr. Errol Musk and his co-pilot] ran into a group of Italians who, as it happened, were in the market for an airplane. Errol named his price, and a deal was done. “So we went to this guy's prefab and he opened his safe and there was just stacks of money and he paid me out, £80,000, it was a huge amount of money,” he said. Standing with the cash in his hand, Errol was made another offer he couldn’t refuse: Would he like to buy half an emerald mine for half of his new riches [presumably about £40,000]? “I said, ‘Oh, all right’. So I became a half owner of the mine, and we got emeralds for the next six years.” (My clarifications in italics)"
 * Was there ever an emerald mine on this earth in which half ownership could be purchased for 40,000 quid? Indeed, there are emerald mines in Zambia and South Africa . How much do they cost? On Quora someone asked a similar question: "How much money does it cost to start a large-scale emerald mine in Nigeria?" The answers: "It will be in the order of 10's to 100's of millions US$, depending on the size of the operation, the size and shape of the deposit, the quality and concentration of the gemstones, local infrastructure (i.e. what you need to build and how expensive transport is), etc." (from a student at University of Pretoria) and "Setup costs will be in the order of $50m in equipment.  Land use consultants will cost another $2-5m.  Wages for a 100 strong workforce will be $250,000 per month, and about the same for the 5-8 geologist, engineers and managers you will need." (from a CEO, Director, CIO, Engineering Manager). Based on this, I believe that a half share in a small emerald mine with one geologist would be worth more than the cost of an airplane. Mr. Errol Musk might ardently and passionately believe that he was once the half owner of an emerald mine, but based on the alleged quotes given us in Mr. Phillip de Wet's articles, I think we can safely say that more investigation of his claims in this area would be warranted before we add them on the Biography of a Living Person on Wikipedia. Just because Business Insider might be considered a reliable source in some areas doesn't mean that we should believe everything we read on the internet. Dollar dollar bill y'all. Geographyinitiative (talk) 02:04, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately we don’t allow independent research on wikipedia, looks like you’ve wasted a lot of time on quora and whatnot for nothing. Horse Eye Jack (talk) 08:49, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
 * So what do you want to add to the article? Geographyinitiative (talk) 08:51, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Acalycine’s most recent text looks good. Also just FYI responding to yourself a half dozen times after you’ve been told to stop bludgeoning is a bad look, you most certainly are bludgeoning this discussion now. Horse Eye Jack (talk) 08:54, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I understand what you are saying, but I think I can convince you that the most recent version from Acalycine has problems. Okay, concerning Acalycine's most recent version: I contest that Errol Musk is ever documented to have claimed that the mine he is alleged to have owned a part of was inside the territorial limits of Zambia. Zambia is mentioned as the location of this mine only in the title of a clearly clickbait article linked to another article published five days earlier supposedly from a edited interview of Errol that describes itself as a "tale" (direct quotation) and not as a fact. The clickbait title clearly exaggerates by using the word 'owns', so we have no clear foundation to say Errol ever directly said the mine was in Zambia. Zambia is not part of any quote or claim attributed to Errol. Never is it said that Errol claimed the alleged mine was in Zambia, hence the wording of Acalycine's latest version has a major flaw in my view. Let me know what you think about this issue. I believe that if you are going to add something to Wikpedia from those clickbait articles, it ought to adhere rigorously to the facts as stated, otherwise Elon will publicly make fun of Wikipedia for posting obvious lies on his BLP. Thanks for your time.Geographyinitiative (talk) 10:27, 11 June 2020 (UTC)


 * At best, based on the way Acalycine has written and supported it so far, I think you could say that a writer from Business Insider South Africa said that the mine was in Zambia, but I don't think you say Errol himself claimed that. We could assume Errol claimed that, but that would "make an ass out of u and me" and Wikipedia. Geographyinitiative (talk) 10:39, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I guarantee you that if we don't stick to the letter of the words on this, Elon Musk is going to bring the internet down on this Wikipedia page my friends. You have to write things carefully, concientiously and clearly. All these drafts from Acalycine and others were somewhat slipshod attempts to ram something through in my view. If you want to mold this clickbait crap into a something informative and notable about Elon Musk's background, you have got to come up with well supported, logical statements preferrably based instead on reliable sources and not this a collection of self-admitted "tales". Geographyinitiative (talk) 11:19, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Don't tell me de Wet's Feb 22 tale about Elon the young emerald thief is unconnected to his equally ludicrous Feb 28 piece about the cheapest purchase of half an emerald mine in human history. Geographyinitiative (talk) 11:30, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
 * "Elon Musk is going to bring the internet down on this Wikipedia page my friends.” I don’t give a single solitary fuck and neither should anyone else. The younger Musk can take it up with BI South Africa if he wants. Please stop being disruptive, responding to two sentences with a wall of text is wack. Either propose text which you would support or shut up, you’ve made your point abundantly clear to everyone and apparently have nothing new to contribute to this discussion... You’re just repeating yourself until you’ve exhausted dissenting voices (which appears to be almost all of them btw) and if you don’t stop now it will end up at a noticeboard and I don’t want to have to do that to you because I highly respect the edits you make in the Taiwan related space. Horse Eye Jack (talk) 19:29, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I propose adding nothing at this time because I do not think the claims in the sources I have seen so far amount to a notable fact about the life of Elon Musk. There may be some way or ways to get the word 'emerald' on this page, but I haven't actively searched for them. Geographyinitiative (talk) 20:14, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I see the Business Insider South Africa articles as money-making clickbait embellishments on what the articles themselves describe as a 'tale' of dubious veracity, many of the details of which are found nowhere else. Geographyinitiative (talk) 21:01, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I can tell you that one of the biggest problems I am having is finding reliable information about the value of any Emerald mine (which is why I resorted to Quora). If anyone can give us an estimate of the value of any emerald mine, especially historical values, please do so. However, I feel that it's quite certain that half ownership of an emerald mine could in no way have been attained by a mere 40,000 quid, half the value of a small airplane. Such an area would be so small or worthless that it would not be considered a mine- perhaps a field that someone saw an emerald in. These are only my rough estimations since I don't have reliable info on 1980s mine values. Geographyinitiative (talk) 03:20, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Dude its literally irrelevant, thats doing original research. Horse Eye Jack (talk) 03:22, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
 * If these "reliable" news articles said the mine was purchased for 20,000 quid, would it be relevant then? 10,000? 5,000? 1,000? If the story said that Errol Musk had purchased a half-stake in a Zambian emerald mine for 15 dollars, would it matter then? Yeah, it would matter: because the story is a rank impossibility. What I'm saying is that I think 40,000 pounds is similarly an impossibly low figure for a real emerald mine. Fake emerald mine? Possibly. Real? No way. I mean, would there even be a geologist on staff? How many laborers? Geographyinitiative (talk) 04:16, 12 June 2020 (UTC)