Talk:Forbes Fictional 15

Scrooge McDuck
The entry for 2013 lists Gatsby at number one at 65.4 billion. The Forbes List lists Scrooge McDuck as the richest with the 65.4 billion. 90.185.58.68 (talk) 23:28, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Uncle Sam
Who added Uncle Sam and why? The character reference supplied links to a real person so is not "fictional". Please delete this entry and question who added it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.34.223.1 (talk • contribs)

Well Forbes did put him in their list so I guess you can take it up with them. LukeSurlt c 19:35, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

We are the Lannisters?! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.15.99.78 (talk) 05:49, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Discontinued?
I've noticed Forbes didn't make a 2009 list. Did the credit crunch hit the fictional world so hard that there are no more billionaires? Or have Forbes discontinued this feature for good? LukeSurlt c 19:35, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism
The 2010 list is not accurate. Somebody please fix it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrewman327 (talk • contribs) 15:47, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

 SilkTork   ✔Tea time  23:12, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Forbes lists
I happened upon this page almost a year ago and have watched it since then, reverting the continuous vandalism by IP editors. I've even had it temporarily semi-protected, which had no long-term effects on deterring vandals. Aside from adding a new year's list of names, there has been no further development of this page. Today, it dawned on me: why do we even have this article? How is a tongue-in-cheek list of fictional characters published by a single magazine considered notable? The article includes no sources outside of the actual Forbes list, nor are there any independent sources for most of the other articles included in the Forbes lists template, like Forbes Celebrity 100, Forbes China Celebrity 100, Korea Power Celebrity 40, Forbes Magazine's List of The World's 100 Most Powerful Women, Forbes Magazine's List of The World's Most Powerful People, Forbes' list of world's highest-paid athletes, and Forbes' list of the most valuable football clubs. At best, these are trivia that doesn't belong on Wikipedia. At worst, we're duplicating primary sources which runs afoul of WP:NOFULLTEXT and may be a copyright infringement. Either way, why do we have this stuff? –Mabeenot (talk) 15:13, 11 December 2012 (UTC) Conditional Delete Ask for reliable refs, give it a few months. If you can't find any refs or no refs appear, list it for Deletion. SD (talk contribs) 00:12, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Keep. I just requested some level of protection for the article to control IP vandals.  This article reflects something that is often cited as a cultural zeitgeist.  Although I'll look for more secondary sources to add in order to give it more context.Andrew (talk) 18:24, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete unless we can get some reliable secondary sources. I'm with SDnogo. If this list is "often cited" we need to see it ASAP. Joja  lozzo  14:57, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
 * This is not the proper venue. If you think it should be deleted, take it to WP:AFD. This is an abuse of the WP:RFC process. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  00:26, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Dr briefs from dragon ball is richer than those guys. He casually gave 10 billion to his friend so he could buy an island — Preceding unsigned comment added by 179.98.97.118 (talk) 14:19, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Continuing Vandalism
Anonymous people can't seem to stop vandalizing this page. (It is now 2015-11-15.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thaumasiotes (talk • contribs) 00:06, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed
Prior content in this duplicated one or more previously published sources. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Moonriddengirl (talk) 10:52, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
 * For more information, please see WP:TOP100 and Copyright in lists. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 10:52, 9 May 2016 (UTC)