Talk:Richard Branson/Archive 2

Birthplace
This article and the Blackheath, London article state that he was born there; the Shamley Green article states he was born in that Surrey village. Where was he actually born? Nietzsche 2 (talk) 02:49, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Years missing
There is over a decade gap between his legal problems due to him avoiding tax causing him to have to pay a large amount of money as a result of being caught, to the next of his business ventures that is mentioned, his Atlantic airline company. What did he do in those years? After having to pay so much money as a result of legal action being taken against him, he must have been broke; his mother re-mortgaged her house. How did he make enough money over the following decade or so in order to (help) repay his mother, and found the airline business? What business ventures was he involved in during those years? Nietzsche 2 (talk) 03:00, 2 March 2009 (UTC)


 * his legal problems due to him avoiding tax causing him to have to pay a large amount of money as a result of being caught


 * Ah, you mean his appearance at Dover Magistraites Court in September 1971 over a £54,000 VAT and HM Customs import duty evasion for which he was convicted. Yes, another piece of dirty washing that Branson doesn't like to mention. Makes you wonder why Fony Blair and his fellow gangsters in the Labour Party were so keen to toady up to a convicted frauster. Also, I thought the USA had entry restrictions on foreign convicted criminals - draw you own conclusions my friends.


 * And while we're on the subject of Branson's legal problems - I see no mention of those episode with various females accusing him of unwanted fondling. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.192.60.30 (talk) 12:38, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Background
Did he grow up in a rich household / family or a poor one? Nietzsche 2 (talk) 03:05, 2 March 2009 (UTC)


 * A: Rich —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.3.31.212 (talk) 13:35, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Parents
Are they alive or dead? Nietzsche 2 (talk) 03:06, 2 March 2009 (UTC)


 * His parents are alive - they were interviews by Piers Morgan about him. Very old though, but made me laugh. - Chris King

91.111.23.34 (talk) 20:28, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Can we call a White British person Anglo-Saxon or will the PC police arrest us?
The resistance to my ethnicity edit is absurd. All sorts of proud ethnicities label their members on Wikipedia... Indian, Jewish, etc. When an Indian person is listed as Indian, other Indians don't question the validity of their ancestry traced to the Indo-European invasion and want a DNA test. Lighten up you Anglo-hating turds. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DmarshallPhD (talk • contribs) 15:46, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

"In contemporary usage, Anglo-Saxon is sometimes used to denote modern peoples or groups considered largely descended from the English, as in White Anglo-Saxon Protestant, and is sometimes used by non-English speakers, especially the French, to denote the Anglosphere." - From Wikipedia article on Anglo-Saxons —Preceding unsigned comment added by DmarshallPhD (talk • contribs) 15:50, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Stop throwing out personal attacks; it's a great way to get blocked from editing. Secondly, anything placed in an article requires verification using a reliable source, or did your academic training not include that detail? Third, "Branson" derives from "son of Bran", which is a Celtic name; the Angles and the Saxons were German tribes. Policy here is also not to emphasise ethnicity unless it contributes to a person's notability. So where is your source for this? -- Rodhull andemu  16:02, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

So he has some Celtic admixture, maybe, like most Anglo-Saxons. I say big deal. Maybe in 15 years we can parse every single one of his genes to a level of detail which satisfies you, unfortunately, that still won't help, given the amorphous flow of genes in evolution. Everyone should realize that ethnicities are a general approximation/categorization. Sorry about the personal attacks. I'm an Anglo-Saxon American and I hate the double standard. Would you parse an Indian person's heritage who is Indian as far back as the eye can see? Or would you look at them and say, they're Indian, and everyone knows they're Indian, and no one disputes that they're Indian, let's call them Indian. I just don't get it. I mean, are the accomplishments of the Anglo-Saxons so overwhelming that we can't enumerate them without being embarrassed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by DmarshallPhD (talk • contribs) 16:09, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The issue here isn't "the accomplishments of the Anglo-Saxons". It is proper sourcing and Wikipedia policy. So again, where is your source for Richard Branson's "ethnicity"? Ward3001 (talk) 16:13, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

You're joking, right? Is Winston Churchill a black guy? God help us. I'm sorry that your country has been compromised. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DmarshallPhD (talk • contribs) 16:15, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * No, I'm not joking. Where is your source for use of the term "Anglo-Saxon" for Branson's ethnicity? And before you jump to another unfounded conclusion, be aware that this "ethnicity" battle has been fought on many articles on people representing multiple ethnicities. No one is singling out your edits. This is fundamental Wikipedia policy. Read WP:V and WP:RS. (And "my country" has nothing to do with this.) Ward3001 (talk) 16:20, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Branson's parents were White Christian English, whose parents were White Christian English, whose parents were White Christian English, whose parents were White Christian English, whose parents were White Christian English. If I can give you evidence of that, would that be enough? I will do it if you say that is enough. Incidentally, on St Patrick's Day, Barack Obama noted that he's part Irish, since his great great great grandfather was born in Ireland. Nobody put it in quotes when they reported it. Please, don't you see that this is absurd? Richard Branson is an Englishman going back as far as anyone can trace. From Wikipedia, "In contemporary usage, Anglo-Saxon is sometimes used to denote modern peoples or groups considered largely descended from the English, as in White Anglo-Saxon Protestant..." Really. DmarshallPhD (talk) 16:33, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Fourth time: Where is your source for use of "Anglo-Saxon" for Branson? Wikipedia cannot source itself, and your opinion is not a legitimate source for Wikipedia. Really. Ward3001 (talk) 16:36, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Agreed, per this guideline. -- Rodhull andemu  16:39, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

You guys should head over to von Neumann's entry. They had the nerve to call him Jewish Hungarian, and say his family were non-practicing Jews, even though most biographies say they celebrated Christian holidays AND Jewish holidays. So, double standard is EVERYWHERE. NO one has responded to the real root of my points. Let me ask, could I reasonably call Prince Charles an Anglo-Saxon? I would love for you to answer that. Sometimes, if the sky is blue, you say it's blue, and then more cowardly souls can cite you as evidence that the sky is blue.DmarshallPhD (talk) 16:48, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is a crap argument. WP:POINT isn't, however. -- Rodhull andemu  16:54, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * WP:OC is also relevant, although it refers to categories I think it also applies here. --John (talk) 17:42, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

I am with the other chaps (and perhaps chapettes). I am sorry: not only is "Anglo-Saxon" an archaic and often incorrect description of a British white person, but is in the context of this article, totally irrelevant. Notability aside, Richard Branson is a Caucasian white male in a country where he is in a majority ethnic group and therefore his ethnicity is not a notable point worth any mention in the article. Also, Anglo Saxon has not been a truly accurate description of a white person's ethnicity for hundreds of years. Britain's history of constant invasion, dilution and migration means that a more accurate description would have to include Norse, Norman, Jute, Brythonic, Celtic and so on… Bottom line: there is no need to mention Branson's ethnicity on the grounds of it being an inaccurate and irrelevant addition to the article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, such as this one. GARETHenterprises© 15:05, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't think it's worth opening up old arguments (March 2009) even though most of us here would probably fully agree with you. The original poster made a pretty extreme point of view, in an aggressive and uncivil manner with no provocation (where did "your country has been compromised" come from?!), which was supported by no-one else, not supported by a reference, and specifically against Wiki policy. Halsteadk (talk) 17:25, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Anglo-Saxon is not an ethnicity, it is a subrace to describe Germanic immigrants from over 1500 years ago. That's the first thing, his ethnicity would be English (no, not British) as an ethnicity can be comprised of a number of subraces (i.e. Bretons, Celts, Anglo-Saxons etc in this instance), as far as I know. We need to come up with standards for defining ethnicity in cases where the subjects of an article do not self-define.

Also, I agree political correctness is ridiculous and is ruining society but in this case its not a matter of political correctness, its a matter of accuracy. Also, he's from Blackheath (in London) so I very much doubt that he is an Anglo-Saxon given that the part of England with the lowest amount of Anglo-Saxon DNA is south of the Thames, plus the fact, as someone stated above, his surname is of Celtic, not Anglo-Saxon origin.

http://www.gnxp.com/MT2/archives/000648.html (http://www.gnxp.com/MT2/archives/000648.html)

P.S. My assertion that Anglo-Saxon heritage is 'weakest' south of the Thames is taken from the above article, which in turn took it from 'A Y Chromosome Census of the British Isles' 27 May 2003. Dudley25 (talk) 20:34, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

No Branson is a Anglo-Saxon English patronymic surname, just like most surnames in not just england but Great Britain are of English Anglo-saxon origin such as Johnson, Edwards (English not Welsh), Anderson, Thompson, all the surnames with son on the end you will find have an Anglo-Saxon English origin http://www.houseofnames.com/ www.surnamedb.com/ try me if you don't believe me.109.154.15.57 (talk) 20:26, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Actually according to his book "Business Stripped Bare", The Sunday Times researched his family tree and found his name Branson derives from the Anglo Saxon "Brandson" which was given to Anglo Saxon farmers that would brand cattle. Interesting aye! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.18.159.249 (talk) 16:36, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

This Wiki Branson article is ludicrous
Anyone who has read Tom Bower's definitive, debunking biography of Branson will recognise all the usual stuff here - dubious assessments of wealth, achievements, charitable contributions, etc, all taken at the subject's face value without any serious evidence to support them. Bower also provides a great deal of information about Branson's career which is absent from the Wiki article. Londoner1961 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:38, 1 June 2009 (UTC).


 * All true. What are you proposing to do about it? 79.76.243.40 (talk) 22:24, 20 June 2009 (UTC)


 * The article seems generally OK to me. Most of the stuff is properly cited, but you are of course welcome to suggest improvements in a more constructive manner than making comments like "ludicrous" and "usual stuff". Viewfinder (talk) 23:23, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

I agree with the first comment here. I have myself read the book by Tom Bower also and understand the point that we should not take media assessments on face value. I have recently come across entrepreneurs such as the Cobra Beers founder (I read an article in The Times that he won many awards but his business recently failed) and Chek Whyte (put on Channel 4's The Secrete Millionaire only to be confirmed bankrupt owing £30m within the same year). This demonstrates to me that we ought to put forward a more balanced view which would require going through the biography by Tom Bower and perhaps looking at some of his sources. I think it would definitely be irresponsible to not include information regarding Richard Branson's financial difficulties over the years.Vubagroup (talk) 00:58, 7 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Lots of luck with that. Sir Richard is notoriously litigious, and sued Bower in an attempt to shut him up and discredit his book. He's also, apparently, a friend of Jimmy Wales. It's evident from the article in any case that it has been produced by an adulatory fan club, so nobody who really wants to know what makes Branson tick will bother with it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.68.205.172 (talk) 12:20, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

"Abortion business" section
I have deleted this, as it seems to give undue prominance to - and is a misrepresentation of - Branson's activities. It is clear from the commentary in the YouTube clip that Branson set up a general "advisory centre" for young people in London, part of the service of which was to facilite abortions. There is no evidence that it was a "business" to do that, which I suspect would have been illegal under British law at the time, anyway. There is no evidence that there was any connection between the advisory centre and the "Virgin" brand. Googling shows that this was the "Student Advisory Centre," which Branson set up at the age of 17, and that it was a charity, not a commercial/business venture. Nick Cooper (talk) 16:17, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Rodhullandemu has beaten me to reverting Unibod's reinstatement. I would, however, reitereate this the text was clearly a gross misrepresentation. As noted above, the Student Advisory Service was a charity and was clearly not solely concerned with abortion advice. There is no connection between it an the "virgin" brand, so speculation on the latter name is inappropriate. Nick Cooper (talk) 16:53, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Agree. Not only can we not link to an apparent copyright violation as a source, giving one item its own section with a tendentious heading ("business"!) is a breach of WP:UNDUE. The Virgin brand was founded somewhat later than this charity, so I agree that connecting the two is inappropriate. Rodhull  andemu  16:59, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Recently deleted information
An IP recently made two edits; one blanked a section and I've reverted that. The other edit, here, removed a few words about his stepson. It was unsourced, and since this is a biography of a living person, and I haven't been able to verify that it was true in the first place, I haven't replaced it. If someone has a source, please re-add it. Mike Christie (talk) 10:48, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Wired magazine article
This article looks useful:



Ottre 00:33, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Libertarian
The politics section of this article claims that Richard Branson is a libertarian. The citations following it had nothing to do with this claim, all being about mayoral possibilities, so I have moved them up and added a tag. Is there a source on this? The claim has been in the article for quite some time, and the talk page archive shows that for more than three years, this claim has been here without citation. This seems to be a glaring error to me. Wikipedia should not be subscribing people to any political ideology without source, especially when grouping it with the possibility of a political run. --OuroborosCobra (talk) 22:54, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, I'm removing it. --OuroborosCobra (talk) 20:48, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

What episode of friends
Hello,

I'm wondering in what episode of friends he starred in.

Thank you in advance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.198.216.170 (talk) 16:07, 3 February 2010 (UTC)


 * imdb.com says: "The One with Ross's Wedding: Part 1" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.198.88.204 (talk) 13:02, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Record business: sale of V2 to Zavvi
He later formed V2 Records to re-enter the music business. This was later sold to Zavvi, which has since closed all stores permanently. I'm pretty sure V2 records was not sold to Zavvi. According to this article, V2_records, it was sold to UMG. Maybe this is a confusion with Virgin Megastores? --Bix (talk) 23:43, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Hagiography
I concur with people above that this reads like a hagiography so comprehensive as to be more than a little suspicious. No mention of the extensive criticisms e.g. in Tom Bower's biography. Unfortunately I don't have the time to rewrite it though. 93.96.236.8 (talk) 11:32, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Tom Bowers book

 * - "Tightfisted" rumours - any truth?

I have a friend who says he has met Mr Branson. This friend says Mr Branson has a reputation for being very mean with his money. It was stated that Mr Branson often says "I didn't get where I am today by giving money away" ( to paraphrase). Can anyone confirm or refute this? Mr Branson is of course well known for his support of many charities.

Fletcherbrian (talk) 07:28, 4 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Further to the above, I've just come across a review of Tom Bower's book on Branson (thank you to all previous contributors who mentioned Tom Bower).
 * Here is an extract of the review, which is on Amazon's website: "Essential reading, Bower reveals the dark side of a chancer who's conned his way into becoming the Nation's favourite tycoon. I'd gained insights and heard tales over the last thirty odd years but Tom Bower exposes the truths to flesh in the details of the skeleton's in Branson's closet."Fletcherbrian (talk) 07:44, 4 September 2011 (UTC)


 * That doesn't actually say much, without any detail of what these "skelteons" are, especially since other reviews are more damning of the book itself. Nick Cooper (talk) 11:49, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

No legal action has been taken by Richard about the book. This would indicate that what the book says is true. You say "other reviews are more damning of the book itself"? Please tell us where these other reviews are.Fletcherbrian (talk) 00:48, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

If sufficient evidence were found I would like to add the comment that Richard is parsimonious to the main article.Fletcherbrian (talk) 01:01, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * - Hi - this is all well and good but please focus on discussion only about possible additions. - imo - claims he is "tightfisted" are out of scope for inclusion as are such attacking opinionated comments as "chancer" etc. Please be aware - WP:BLP applies to talkpages just as much as article content. Off2riorob (talk) 00:54, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * If I was you I would back of - wikipedia takes its articles about living people and policy compliance extremely seriousely - I have asked you on your talk page, I suggest you stop posting to this talkpage and be aware your editing ability is a privilege and not a right. Off2riorob (talk) 01:03, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

"Business failures"
I agree with the IP editor that these should be removed - we (currently) have one source saying that these ventures are failures. We could possibly say "The Times has described Virgin Cola, etc. as failures" but it is certainly not worthy of a whole section. Absolutelypuremilk (talk) 08:54, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
 * What do you mean, one source? I added the second source (virgin) on 21 Nov after the content of the section was challenged by the same IP editor. A number of other newspapers classify (some of) them as failures but I chose a primary source in this case because the IP was arguing along the line of the original Times article beaing an "opinion piece". Please let us know what was your reasoning behind your comment so that other editors can react appropriately and so I can see this comment of mine was not a waste of time. Thanks, WikiHannibal (talk) 09:37, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I agree with you. That looks like an excellent source to me. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:21, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
 * The article is a hit piece and not reliable. Just being published does not make something any good. 91.110.126.37 (talk) 21:58, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
 * If it's a "hit piece", why exactly was it published by virgin.com? Martinevans123 (talk) 22:02, 29 November 2018 (UTC)


 * If anything the section needs expanded to give a larger and more rounded summary of the very large range of "virgin" branded things that have come and gone over the years (aka "failed"). The list is truly endless.  Virgin Trains East Coast being one of the most recent examples - it may only have had a 10% holding in the overall operation, but it is branding all the same, and given RB's personal interest in the UK rail network all the way back to the initial privatisation, (and his current advocacy that the actual physical infrastructure be broken up and sold to him) its failure (it effectively went bust) is noteworthy in the context of his personal reputation on the topic.  As for the anon's comments, I'm afraid it is a fact that these businesses did not succeed - the common word for that is failure, and those are facts that we should reflect.  We are not in the business of burnishing images, but reporting facts. SFC9394 (talk) 23:24, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
 * This is not a personal soapbox or the article on the Virgin group. Stick those items where they belong which is not here.91.110.126.37 (talk) 23:36, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Entrepreneurship
I want to start a section on how Sir Richard Branson has inspired many other entrepreneurs. I have ref's including one from CNBC and quotes of how Branson himself succeeded and wants everyone to succeed. I was thinking of inserting this section between Early life and Early business career. In the business world he is known for this spirit and many others have become very successful on following his advise on how to be successful in business. Mitchellhobbs (talk) 03:03, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Tax problems
In the section Early business career we read "Branson eventually started a record shop in Oxford Street in London. In 1971, he was questioned in connection with the selling of records that had been declared export stock. The matter was never brought before a court because Branson agreed to repay any unpaid VAT of 33% and a £70,000 fine. His parents re-mortgaged the family home in order to help pay the settlement". This is referenced to Branson's autobiography. In the section Tax evasion we read "In 1971, Branson was convicted and briefly jailed for tax evasion, having fraudulently obtained export documents for records to be sold on the domestic market in order to avoid paying Purchase Tax.[142][143] Customs officials caught onto the scheme and executed a sting operation, marking records bought for the international market with invisible ink and subsequently buying them on the domestic market. Branson was advised of the sting by an anonymous tip-off and attempted to dispose of the evidence, but this was unsuccessful", and this is referenced to articles in Slate and Liberty Voice. The two passages in our article appear to refer to the same event. I would note that it is impossible for Branson to have failed to pay VAT in 1971, as it was not introduced in the UK until 1973, whereas Purchase Tax was in force in 1971. DuncanHill (talk) 15:41, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

From what I remember, he drove over to the Continent and bought records in bulk then returned and sold them in the UK without paying Purchase Tax. He was very lucky to avoid prison. 2A00:23C6:FE80:7900:5129:69B3:8E5:F19E (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 10:34, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Discussion at Template talk:Infobox person
You are invited to join the discussion at Template talk:Infobox person.  Spy-cicle💥  Talk? 19:08, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 July 2021
change "86 meters" to "86 kilometers" Potatoradius (talk) 19:55, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
 * It looks like this has been fixed. RudolfRed (talk) 23:17, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

It's 86km, not meters
On recent edge of space travel. Mgtroyas (talk) 21:34, 11 July 2021 (UTC)