Talk:Tim Blixseth

Vandalism
Content specific to criminal acts, bankruptcies and other information the subject of this article might want removed but previously reviewed, verified with appropriate references and discussed for POV and relevance in this and other talk pages appears to be being removed by an anonymous editor using an intentionally masked blocked IP address. Posting here before reporting and reverting to give an opportunity for the editor to provide a response.AliceStanley11 (talk) 22:36, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

Untitled
RE: Use of quotes. The quotes included in this profile are frequently cited in articles about Tim Blixseth and found in publications of quotes for famous people. They are relevant and not over-used in this profile. Trnsproducers (talk) 14:52, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Disquieting that this page has been locked for "vandalism" when it looks like all changes were justified and had accompanying comments....improper use of tag? 75.192.106.64 (talk) 15:07, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Deleted following sentence: However, by 2010 Blixseth creditors and court documents asserted he was "insolvent on paper." The source given is citing a Yellowstone Trust claims that asserts Blixseth moved all his assets to a new entity, Desert Ranch LLC, to protect his assets from creditors, however, this doesn't prove that Blixseth is "insolvent on paper." 70.108.250.239 (talk) 17:33, 12 December 2011 (UTC) A more recent article by the Associated Press puts his net worth around $200 million - definitely not insolvent. (see article: http://o.seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2015094913_apusbillionairesbankruptcydismissed3rdldwritethru.html) 70.108.250.239 (talk) 18:13, 12 December 2011 (UTC) - OK, so it appears Blixseth is only "insolvent" on paper for the purposes of avoiding paying legal claims against him? The news article and court documents claims he moved what assets he had to a Nevada land trust of some kind to protect them from creditors and tax authorities who claim he owes them money. How is his current "net worth" calculated at $200M - if creditors who claim he owes them hundreds of millions of dollars - state he is insolvent on paper? You certainly have your PR work cut out for you defending this guy. --- it's also quite annoying that any work done to make a quality BLP page for this person devoid of bias is automatically labeled "publicity mumbo jumbo" by other users...the point is to highlight facts and controversy but in a high-quality way that's up to Wikipedia standards 69.255.139.241 (talk) 12:41, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Claims are one thing...facts are another, and as a BLP article, entries need to be accurate and verified without bias...citing court papers by claimants is not the best way of putting together "facts" on a person....as anything can be claimed in a complant. Not sure who the PR guy is here...but seems like many entries in this article are slanted in a biased manner 69.255.139.241 (talk) 23:34, 13 December 2011 (UTC) It appears 69.255.139.241and jhoya86 want to have it both ways here in portraying this BLP.  They suggest it's OK, for example, to include referenced claims (although no evidence in fact) that Mr. Blixseth generated $147 million in aid to victims of Hurricane Katrina - even though the only sources for those claims is Mr. Blixseth, and court records from his bankruptcy trial and tax documents from the groups he claimed got his largess don't reflect any such donations. Then they suggest that referenced claims, publicly documented in court filings and news reports - that Mr. Blixseth has moved and protected his assets from creditors are somehow not valid or relevant to his net work characterizations. You seek to recast Mr. Blixseth and remove references to his own claims, i.e., his heavily promoted $155 million dollar home, just because it never actually existed. The point of including that and similar references is that he appears to have claimed many things existed, when they didn't and that is a recurring them and ke factor in his various projects' bankruptcies. Just like the donations to Katrina victims. The Blixseth story here is about his claims of wealth and related dealings - these are what make him notable and meriting of inclusion on Wikipedia. He has plenty of fluff portrayals in other paid biographical listings online - these references are all well referenced and non-misleading statements about this person. Your efforts to recast him are simply publicity maneuverings that present a misleading and inaccurate reflection of the actual record.

Deleted the following section: Prior to formalizing his timber and real estate career, Blixseth tried his hand in the music and songwriting business. Blixseth never attended college and after high school he traveled to and from Los Angeles attempting to launch a music career in Hollywood. During this time Blixseth married and divorced his first wife, failed to make his mark in Hollywood, and eventually returned to Oregon to focus his sights on real estate and timber. because if you read the actual article that is cited, it does not corroborate the article, particularly facts about his time in Hollywood and his music career 69.255.139.241 (talk) 13:01, 7 December 2011 (UTC) - Reverted deletion with proper reference 'Tim Blixseth biography' as published in Woopidoo which details these facts. Trnsproducers.

If Blixseth's Pinnacle home was fictional and was never broken ground on, it should not be in this article and should be deleted from the assets section. Jhoya86 (talk) 13:56, 30 November 2011 (UTC) I agree, if there was no ground or proof of the existence of the house/project, then why is this recorded under the assets heading? This should be deleted. There seems to be a lot of unnecessary/useless information in this article 70.108.250.239 (talk) 19:53, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Changes made were not promotional, instead they referred to several articles, including respectable sources like Fortunate Magazine which do not include press release quotes. While there might be a public relations campaign to promote Mr. Blixseth, the changes made previously were made only in an effort to inject facts and neutrality into an article that is everything but neutral Jhoya86 (talk) 04:31, 30 November 2011 (UTC) C'mon - you are clearly Tim Blixseth's PR guy. These are promotional and fictional changes - no other source than Tim Blixseth can be found verifying that he ever made good on the $127M claim. His song never even sold enough copies to come close to donating that amount, nor did the sales of the total combined record. The charities he claimed would benefit didn't report in their tax returns or anywhere else a receipt of such a donation. Just because I've made changes to adjust an article of a living person to meet the standards of wikipedia does not make me anyone's PR guy...read the rest of this lengthy and under sourced article which includes several critical and biased claims Jhoya86 (talk) 15:26, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Changes to Tim Blixseth by Jhoya86 appear to be promotional in nature and drawing only from marketing claims made by Tim Blixseth and sourced only to Tim Blixseth press releases. For example, the only sources for the claim that Tim Blixseth donated $125 million to hurricane victims come from Blixseth quotes in news interviews and press releases. Much like many Blixseth claims, this appears to be unsubstantiated and various publicly available court case records do not reveal that any such contributions from Blixseth ever happened. Much like his much acclaimed "world's most expensive home - The Pinnacle" - which was promoted with pictures, websites and brochures and appears today on many top ten lists of most expensive and exclusive homes - this donation appears to exist on paper only. The Blixseth Pinnacle home was fictitious and these contributions appears to be so as well. JHoya86 provides no records of non-profit agencies receiving such a donation and this reference should be removed. These edits all coincide with a public relations campaign by Mr. Blixseth and a promised autobiography (which like the Pinnacle and donations only exists in press releases so far but is being promoted as if it's been published) and appears to be a public relations effort to change the historical facts associate with Mr. Blixseth's biography here on Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.162.5.14 (talk) 21:51, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Source 40 does not meet Wikipedia's standards, and that entire paragraph about his songwriting seems like one big fabrication. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.30.205.12 (talk) 07:13, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

bloated, non-RS claims, UNDUE violations ...
I trimmed some of this but the amont is disgusting in what is supposed to meet WP:BLP. Press releases (some from special interest groups), and other improper sources (including primary court documents), and unsourced claims abound in this article, which needs someone to continue the pruning. Collect (talk) 15:28, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'll lend a hand as time allows. -- — Keithbob •  Talk  • 16:00, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Other editors please feel free to join the discussion on the BLPN here -- — Keithbob • Talk  • 21:43, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

NPOV tag
I've addd a NPOV tag as the article seems very biased. In particular the lead which focuses solely on the subject's net worth and litigation and fails to neutrally summarize the entire article. -- — Keithbob • Talk  • 17:54, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Another notification at WP:BLPN for POV content on this article using primary sources
See discussion here: -- — Keithbob • Talk  • 21:18, 7 July 2014 (UTC)