Talk:Nerissa Soon-Ruiz

Reliable sources!
This is a biography of a living person and must conform to Wikipedia's strict requirements for reliable sources and proper weight. I also consider a sentence like "in 2007 her Staement (sic) of Assets Liabilities and Net Worth showed an increase of her net assets to more than 1,350% in just 5 five years!" to be poblematic - without context it seems to be very tendentious. If she came in fresh from university with a net worth of 1 Peso, she now has enough to order Ketchup on her fries once... --Stephan Schulz (talk) 09:17, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

I have removed all unsourced content in line with BLP.Martinlc (talk) 23:34, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Her net assets in 2002 was -265,000.00 pesos : http://www.mbc.com.ph/congresswatch/congressmembers/profile-soonRuiz.htm

In 2007 it had increased to more than 3.5Million pesos : http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2466/3672378564_faa15e2e85_b.jpg

these data shows an increase of "infinity"(?) according to my sources. I hope you can help me clarify the percentage increase of her net assets from these data. Thank you


 * Thank you for posting this query here. Wikipedia has policies on the type of information it considers 'encyclopedic', which are expecially strict when delaing with teh Biographies of Living Persons WP:BLP.  It discourages the inclusion of material based on the interpretation of primary sources by the editor (WP:PRIMARY).  If you felt that some comment on her wealth should be included in the article, you should find a Reliable Source WP:RS which mentions it (for example, a newspaper article saying 'she has rapidly become a millionaire since joining parliament').  You would then be reporting an opinion held by somebody else, not stating your own.Martinlc (talk) 12:36, 29 June 2009 (UTC)


 * what do you think about the links I've posted? Will these do?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.104.122.58 (talk) 14:11, 29 June 2009 (UTC)


 * the first is ok: I can't access the Yahoo one - I assume it's a pdf or something? If so, the latter would be a pirmary source of unprovable origin.  A media report would be much better.

Failing that, the asset info is enough to merit the addition of a statement that she holds assets of XX (although I note that she's actually in deficit at the moment). Martinlc (talk) 14:23, 29 June 2009 (UTC)


 * This link takes you to a photocopy of Soon-Ruiz's 2007 SALN which is posted in Flickr which I exchanged for the yahoo link that you couldn't access :)  :  http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2466/3672378564_faa15e2e85_b.jpg


 * Ok. But just because something is true doesn't make it encyclopedic. We would normally only include information about a politician's wealth (past or present) it is has been deemed  notable by a Reliable Source (such as a news organistaion) - otherwise we are doing Original Research ({{WP:OR]]).  If her wealth is a debated issue, there should be media quotes which can be cited to demonstrate this.Martinlc (talk) 07:38, 30 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Her wealth gain is not yet a debated issue locally but I hope it will be. How much is her net assets percentage increase based on these data?  My sources says it's infinity but I have my doubts. Thanks.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.104.112.128 (talk) 10:41, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * In terms of mathematics, you could express an increase from 0.235 million to 3.5 million as an increase by 15 times, or 1500%. However, Wikipedia is not the place for criticising (implicitly or explicitly) such an increase - we need to wait until criticism have been reported by others in reliable sources before it can be added her. If you wish to promote or start a campaign to criticise her, you should start your own blog or website, rather than add inappropriate content to Wikipedia (see WP:PILLAR for guidance on its philosophy and approach.Martinlc (talk) 10:58, 30 June 2009 (UTC)


 * her net assets is not 235,000 increasing to 3.5 Million. It's - (negative) 265,000 increasing to 3.58 Million in five or six years !  Her net assets increase is definitely not just 1,500% it's much, much more. My math expert says it's infinity can you give me your opinion how much her net assets percentage increase is?  We really need your input here.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.104.112.128 (talk) 12:41, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * This is a mathematics question, not an editorial one. As presented, your mathematician is correct - you cannot compare negative and positive quantities in that way.  However, as I noted above, technically she is still in deficit, since her liabilities exceed her assets.  She is not tehrefore worth 3.5 million: she owes 295,000 (or whatever the figure is).  The most you could argue now is that her deficit has changed from X to Y opver time, expressed as a % if you wish.  But whatever, don't include the sum in this article, for the reasons I outlined above.Martinlc (talk) 12:48, 30 June 2009 (UTC)


 * her net assets is not 235,000 increasing to 3.5 Million. It's - (negative) 265,000 increasing to

+ (positive) 3.58 Million in five or six years ! Her net assets increase is definitely not just 1,500%. it's much, much more. she's definitely not in deficit :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.104.112.128 (talk) 16:03, 30 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Ok - I misunderstood.Martinlc (talk) 16:20, 30 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Percentage-wise how much would that net assets increase be ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.104.112.128 (talk) 16:33, 30 June 2009 (UTC)


 * There is no way to present that change as a percentage. Percentages are used to compare two quantities on the same scale.  You could, if you wished, talk about orders of magnitude (one order of magnitude = 10 x the original), but I don't see why you would, when stating the actual figures is clearer and more precise.Martinlc (talk) 16:40, 30 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you so much. Your input has cleared a lot of things here on our end.  God Bless.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.104.112.128 (talk) 17:43, 30 June 2009 (UTC)