Talk:Nahum Galmor

Neutrality tag
I have some serious questions regarding this article and whether it complies with Wikipedia policy on biographies of living persons. In particular, the article lists allegations where no wrong-doing has been proven, sounding more than a bit like a grand jury hearing: " ... In 2003 ... Galmor took over Thermphos ... Thermphos (consolidated) the international phosphorus and derivatives sector ... Galmor ... expanded Thermphos ... In October 2009 Galmor was indicted in Israel for "fraudulently obtaining goods or benefits". He is accused to have conspired with the controversial Russian-Israeli businessman Arcadi Gaydamak to deceive the shareholders of Thermphos .... The prosecutor in Tel Aviv alleges that Galmor acted as a straw man for Gaydamak during the negotiations and that he presented $50 million of Gaydamak's money as belonging to him. The prosecutor claims that Gaydamak had concealed his identity because he knew the shareholders of Thermphos would not sell the firm to someone with his reputation .... The Israeli business publication The Marker described the investigation against Gaydamak as politically motivated and wrote that several important witnesses and former shareholders of Thermphos have not been questioned by the prosecutor ... The Dutch daily De Telegraaf linked Galmor and Thermphos to the sale of chemical weapons ... According to the report an Israeli intelligence service tried to prevent the sale of Thermphos to Galmor because of fears that Thermphos might be abused for trading chemical products with Iran ... "

I would like a more experienced biography editor to please check this article for neutrality and BLP concerns. Because this isn't clear-cut to me, I haven't blanked the article or placed a more aggressive tag. TreacherousWays (talk) 13:26, 17 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I didn't review the article as a whole, but I looked at the Telegraaf article with assistance from Google Translate, and though quite arguably it hinted at more because it speaks of them in close proximity to comments about an "arms dealer", all it says is "chemical products", not "chemical weapons". (I'm not sure what the implications of the phrase can be in Dutch, but they definitely have another word for chemical weapons)  If they're not going to cross that gap neither should we - especially since the thought of a boatload of mustard gas sailing out of Amsterdam seems rather fantastic.  It seems more plausible that they're worried about someone putting a hole in the wall of embargoes around Iran.


 * Oddly, the article softballs the same source on its main claim - it makes specific allegations about Gaydamak and the Russian mafia. I'm not going to get into this enough to expand the article right now, but there seems to be room for it. Wnt (talk) 17:13, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Disagreement
I don't think the article is problematic at all. It does, in my opinion, not prejudge the biographed person in any way. On the contrary. The article reports on an on-going prosecution an cites the pros and even the cons of this prosecution. All the quotes are based on the referenced articles (which are from respected publications). 83.79.146.78 (talk) 22:18, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Nahum Galmor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added tag to http://www.mbendi.com/orgs/co8m.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100810093714/http://www.kazphosphate.kz/eng/ to http://www.kazphosphate.kz/eng/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 12:20, 11 February 2018 (UTC)