Talk:George Soros

250k Donated to Newsom Recall.
Could you add 250k donated to stop Gavin Newsom Recall in 2021. https://calmatters.org/politics/2021/07/newsom-recall-million-dollar-donors/

Adding "political donor" to the lead paragraph
Due to Mr Soro's large and consistent donations to political organisations and figures, surely it would make sense to add Political donor to the opening of the lead paragraph. Interested to here the thoughts about this from other users. Basedosaurus (talk) 00:44, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Yes to this. And actually it should say "political activist", as Mr. Soros has used his funds extensively to fund political actions and activities that he supports. — Preceding unsigned comment added by StorG (talk • contribs) 04:27, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

"False" Claims
At the bottom of the intro, none of the sources provide evidence that far-right theorists have promoted FALSE claims that characterize Soros as a dangerous "puppet master" behind alleged global plots. There are claims, but they are not verifiably false, and being that the claims themselves have not been verified true or false, perhaps it is best to remove that entire sentence due to being speculative/opinionated. Ainchamama (talk) 16:00, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
 * "Smear," "bizarre," and "outlandish" do appear in those sources. No doubt you can find something that covers the "false" if you look around.  Acroterion   (talk)   17:39, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Such as Reuters, Fact check: False claims about George Soros – Muboshgu (talk) 17:43, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Completely agree with here. I'd also add that the paragraph itself is unsuited for the intro as it neglects to mention that there are many controversies and legitimate criticisms of Soros that are widespread (and subsequently covered throughout the article). The paragraph is so specific and dismissive of these "far right" criticisms of Soros that it suggests he is merely a charitable philanthropist victim to smears, when the reality is there are many others who are not "far right" who would argue that's far from the truth. I think we should just chuck the whole paragraph and replace it with something like "Soros remains a figure of great controversy, with both his business practices and political funding being the subjected to a mixture of praise and criticism alike. He has been the subject of many conspiracy theories, with many fringe political groups speculating as to the extent of his global influence in geopolitical and economic affairs". --Jkaharper (talk) 23:36, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
 * And your source for that paragraph will be? HiLo48 (talk) 01:09, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
 * What "legitimate criticisms"? There are none that I am aware of after reading our article (you don't mean Société Générale, do you? One comment made by Paul Krugman?) that would justify such a wishy washy statement in the lead that could appear to give credence to George Soros conspiracy theories. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:15, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Well this might be news to you, but when you possess the power to crash a market (or to deepen a crash by betting on it), that has repercussions for national governments and for ordinary people. There's a huge ethical debate on whether that should be possible. Plenty of criticism of him and his practices online if you just look. Try here, here, here, and here. All pass WP:RS and are mainstream sources. --Jkaharper (talk) 17:00, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Clicked the first link, it starts with New York (CNN) - Elon Musk launched a baseless Twitter attack on George Soros, a frequent target for antisemitic conspiracy theories, accusing the financier of hating humanity days after Soros disclosed having sold off a modest stake in Tesla. It goes on to cite no legitimate criticism of Soros, so an odd choice by you to present this as though it does. In fact it highlights the conspiracy theories... Soros, 92, is a longtime target of right wing conspiracy theorists and of antisemites. He is a prominent contributor to Democratic candidates and liberal causes. Open Secrets, which tracks political contributions, shows he contributed $50 million to the Democracy PAC II Superpac in November, and $125 million in the fall of 2022. He is also founder and the major contributor of the Open Society Foundations, with a stated aim of working for justice, democratic governance, and human rights. It has raised the ire of some authoritarian regimes, including that of Viktor Orban, prime minister of Soros’ native Hungary. Orban is an ally of Russian president Vladimir Putin, accused of his own authoritarian moves in Hungary. Attacks on Soros have increased in recent years alongside a broader increase in incidents of antisemitic attacks. The ADL said that US antisemitic incidents reached their highest level last year since the group began recording them in 1979. Then it continues with the rise of the right-wing on Twitter. The Guardian starts off mentioning unspecified "failures" in their subheading, then declares It is for this reason that Soros’s failures are so telling; they are the failures not merely of one man, but of an entire class – and an entire way of understanding the world. The JC notes that Soros is partisan. Shocker. WP:NEWSWEEK is unreliable and that's noted as an opinion piece written by a conservative, Josh Hammer, again complaining that Soros is partisan.
 * This isn't news to me. It's not news to anybody. You know what is news to me? You need to brush up on WP:CIVIL. I'm not responding to you again with that tone. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:20, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
 * You don't sound at all unbiased or impartial with how you've approached this conversation alone. This reads like pure apologism for Soros with a touch of temper to boot. Just because you don't think the criticism is valid doesn't mean a Wikipedia page, which is by nature supposed to be impartial, should take sides. I would actually say forget the more neutral replacement--which you describe as "wishy-washy"-- and just put nothing there at all for that third paragraph, as it is totally unnecessary. But you give the impression that even just suggesting that will lead to either more anger, or maybe being ignored entirely.
 * This is very disappointing to see, and Wikipedia needs to be held to a higher standard than this. 75.113.98.48 (talk) 18:22, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
 * We do take sides. Specifically, the side of reliable sources. We do not engage in false balances  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) 18:33, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Yep. I was quite calm when I wrote that, by the way. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:06, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
 * There are countless valid criticisms of George Soros and you seem to be using the anti-semetic label to destroy any valid criticism. There are anti-semetic conspiracy theories thst exist around Soros. But there are criticisms as well. AtypicalPhantom (talk) 21:12, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Please share some of that "valid" criticism. I haven't seen anything but globalist and anti-semetic conspiracy theorizing. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:18, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
 * How 'bout the fact that "Project Death in America" which Soros funds supports euthanasia and assisted suicide? 75.113.98.48 (talk) 18:10, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
 * In what way is that criticism? It's a fact, but so what? --jpgordon&#x1d122;&#x1d106;&#x1D110;&#x1d107; 18:16, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
 * You agree it's a fact? Cool. Put it on the page. Don't even need to call it criticism, let folks decide for themselves. Muboshgu thinks it's cool because other people do questionable stuff too, that's perfectly fine. Everyone's entitled to an opinion, so unless something about this fact you acknowledge disturbs you, no reason not to add it, is there? 75.113.98.48 (talk) 20:07, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
 * You haven't actually read the article, I see. George Soros. --jpgordon&#x1d122;&#x1d106;&#x1D110;&#x1d107; 23:29, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
 * – Muboshgu (talk) 23:52, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
 * They focus on end-of-life issues. One could criticize our society for how we handle terminal illness. We're more humane with our pets in many cases. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:28, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Yeah, you certainly could criticize that! That's rather the point of criticism, lol. Don't see how that's related. 75.113.98.48 (talk) 20:16, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 May 2024
There should be an addition to say that soros did in fact help confiscate property from jews to help the nazis. Here is a link to the interview where he admitted it: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/arunpudur_in-a-1998-interview-george-soros-admits-to-activity-7045000603265093632-H-yN?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_android 2603:7000:1200:F916:2454:3FB4:9873:D22C (talk) 10:13, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Charliehdb (talk) 10:38, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

False information regarding country name
In the article, at the subection "Central and Eastern Europe" of the section https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Soros#Political_involvement there is, at points, constant mention of a country called "Macedonia". Northern Macedonia is the recognized international name of the referenced country and that should be reflected in a respectable source like wikipeda. An edit request should be put forward and a change should be made to the article, substituting "Macedonia" with "Northern Macedonia" at all instances of this country's name. 155.207.84.157 (talk) 10:36, 11 July 2024 (UTC)