Talk:Umaru Mutallab

...and one of the richest men in Africa

 * I removed this phrase from the lede, because it seems unlikely. Umaru Mutallab was clearly very successful in his profession, and had a number of important jobs, but from what I can tell he was always a salaried employee. It is therefore extremely unlikely that he is one of Africa's richest people (which in any case is a somewhat weasely statement - how many are in this 'richest' group? 100? 10,000?).
 * I know it's been taken from the Times story on him, but just because the Times says it, don't make it so. My suspicion is that this 'fact' made its way from a Press Release into a newspaper story, at which point it became true. I can't find any evidence of huge inherited wealth, or any large windfall that would explain the claim - does anyone know either a) where the money came from, b) exactly how wealthy he is, or b) where the claim originally came from? Little grape (talk) 16:29, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
 * It is reported by an RS. If you would like to attribute it to the source, that would be fine, but I don't think it is proper to delete it.  As to whether it was true, you're assertions might be what we call synthesis or original research on wp, but in any event he was also chair of a major financial institution.--Epeefleche (talk) 16:55, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I think your attribution in the article is a good way round it for now, yes. The Times has once again demonstrated lazy journalism (or, more likely, a deadline that didn't allow proper checking) but it's not something we can disprove without more facts. There are lists of the 'richest men in Nigeria' on various blog-type sites, and Umaru doesn't feature on a single one of those lists (let alone the whole of Africa). There's a few dodgy sources that list the richest men (they're all men BTW) in all of Africa, and once again Umaru doesn't appear. 'ClickAfrica' has examined the latest Forbes list and extracted out the top ten richest in Africa - again, Umaru is missing.  If you agree Forbes is a reliable source, then you might also agree that his not being listed anywhere by them indicates that the claim in the Times article is wrong - or at the very least the phrase 'one of the richest men in Africa' is ill-defined and thus meaningless.
 * There's no evidence whatsoever of his supposed great wealth apart from the Times' weasel phrase; you point out that he was Chairman of a major institution, but that sounds to me like another salaried position and not something that would generate even a fraction of the wealth required to be one of Africa's richest men. His London flat is a somewhat modest basement three-bedder in a nice part of town, but not the sort of thing a real plutocrat would own. Yes, I can see he's well-off, and very wealthy by any measure, but it's a *big* step to make the claim that he's one of the wealthiest men in Africa, particularly when Forbes says he doesn't even make the top ten in Nigeria.... but I'm happy with your solution for now; it makes sense, and doesn't just parrot the weasel phrase. Thanks Little grape (talk) 23:05, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

I agree that this claim should be removed. It is vague and the claim made by The Times is not supported by any reliable source. JBsupreme (talk) 00:34, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
 * The Times itself is an RS.--Epeefleche (talk) 04:41, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Not when it isn't making any kind of a functional claim it isn't. JBsupreme (talk) 07:17, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
 * What's your basis for saying that? Also -- see the three additional RS assessments of him, including that of the NY Times.--Epeefleche (talk) 20:26, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Shouldn't a wikipedia page avoid terms like "terrorist?" "His son... is a terrorist." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.74.74.48 (talk) 17:21, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed
Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: here and here. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Diannaa (talk) 20:39, 10 July 2015 (UTC)