Talk:Maurice Kanbar

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Neutrality questioned[edit]

This article is so heavily manipulated by those pro or con Kanbar, it's difficult to understand his significant accomplishments, or issues with what he's done.

I read the lawsuit article quoted from SFGate, and was slightly surprised an editor would choose to mention something so trivial. It's difficult to understand what this other lawsuit even has to do with Kanbar [1].

A film school was named after him. In return for him making a large donation, or out of respect for his accomplishments?

Moreover, the article is just badly written. What does it mean he "owns 36 patents"? That he invented them, or that he bought them? Or that they were created by companies he owns?

Finally, I've removed and had reverted "Kanbar is listed amongst the many Jewish individuals who lost money to Bernard Madoff." Now I've added a request for citation. What "list" is being referred to? Is this rumor, libel, or fact? Piano non troppo (talk) 20:29, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The neutrality is certainly questionable. Why is it that the primary attribute used to describe him (controversial) has no source? There are no mentions of controversies that would make the term generally applicable to describe him.
The motivation for a beneficiary of a charitable grant is certainly a legitimate issue, but is it relevant for an encyclopedic entry? A mention of such a donation is a factual issue. An attempt to question its motivation is neither factual nor neutral. It's also not very relevant. Kanbar gives donations to support the arts and causes he believes in. If there's no quid pro quo regarding the decision to name something after him, why question it? Obviously those who name a building after him are thankful for the donation, but their motivation and his are to have a building and environment for a specific purpose; If the donation allows a film school to offer things to the community, and Kanbar obviously would not donate unless he supported that particular goal, then it becomes a moot point. They would respect his accomplishment of allowing a film school to thrive and offer a venue to film students. To say anything else would be mind reading and would imply a nonsensical notion.
Kanbar owns 36 patents. That's a neutral statement. He is a prolific inventor and all the patents are for his ideas. But such a statement, regardless of veracity, would not be appropriate without a specific source. Likewise, questioning the source of the patent ownership is equally irrelevant without specific sources or indications that is even a questionable issue.
Statements about specific lawsuits would be relevant if the general issue of Kanbar's controversial nature could be established. If an inventor with billions of dollars is being sued for a multi million dollar issue, that's not the same as being sued for billions that comprise a very large portion of his wealth. Disputes over 16 patents would support the notion that he is controversial, but the idea that billionaires deal with occasional lawsuits is nothing new.
I don't know how relevant the Madoff issue is to the article regardless of whether there's a legitimate citation. He lost many millions of dollars in the recent economic downturn and so did almost all people with his wealth. So what? If it was not related to his accomplishments, it's irrelevant. Hagrinas (talk) 21:51, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. Kanbar is an interesting figure but this article is a POV mess. I will make another effort to eliminate obvious POV matter (like the unnecessary and uninformative word "controversial" in the lede), whatever that's supposed to mean) and identify statements that need better citation in reliable sources. In addition, I note that a number of statements are cited to essentially self-published sources or sources that are otherwise of somewhat marginal reliability; these may be sufficient in some cases but the article would be improved if better sources can be identified. I am also going to post this at WP:BLP/N to get some more eyes here.--Arxiloxos (talk) 22:52, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]


12th March 2010: This whole piece is trying to be a promotional article for Kanbar. He is a self-promoter of the first order and this "advert" should be edited to show the truth about him not just opinions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.86.158.186 (talk) 05:39, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The material in this article is subject to Wikipedia's policy on biographies of living persons, as well as all other Wikipedia policies. This means that all contentious material must be verifiable in a reliable source. In addition, the article must be written with a neutral point of view. In my opinion, this article has, at various times in the past, gone too far in each direction, and I have tried to excise both the unsourced puffery and the unsourced attacks. If you have specific objections to the current content and you can provide a reliable source to support alternative neutrally-worded text, then by all means you should propose the alternatives here on the talk page, and we can see if there is a consensus for the proposed changes. --Arxiloxos (talk) 07:01, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Birth year for Mr. Kanbar is not correct[edit]

The 1918 birth date given for Mr. Kanbar is definitely not correct. I cannot offer an independent citation for that, but as a former consultant for him, I can state from personal knowledge that he is not that old. His correct year of birth is approximately 1935.AnEmployee (talk) 00:29, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Respectfully disagree with this.[edit]

I was Mr. Kanbar's Assistant (temp.) in the mid-1990s, and he was at least 70 then; which would make 1918 a plausible birth year.

BostonKaren (talk) 18:51, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The 1918 date certainly appears to be incorrect. This article from 1999[2] states that he was in his sixties then. The Copyright Office registration for his book[3] says he was born in 1930.--Arxiloxos (talk) 00:25, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you BostonKaren (12th March 2010). I also have had involvement with Kanbar and having seen his passport, his birth year is 1918. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.86.158.186 (talk) 05:38, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is an obituary in the San Francisco Chronicle on 8/28/22 that says he was born on March 1, 1929 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:640:8780:73C0:546B:37B1:B3E1:D122 (talk) 16:14, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Birthdate[edit]

Just to make the point again, in light resumed changes by IP editors of Kanbar's birth year: All cited sources support the 1930 birthday shown in the article, and no reliable sources have been cited to support the claimed 1918 birthday. Changing this information without reliable sources to substantiate the change violates Wikipedia's policies regarding biographies of living persons.--Arxiloxos (talk) 00:01, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I work for MK as of 12/12/11 and can attest to the 1930 birthdate, but short of xeroxing his passport, I don't know how to prove that to y'allTowelbearer (talk) 00:29, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

removing POV tag with no active discussion per Template:POV[edit]

I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:

This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
  1. There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
  2. It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
  3. In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.

Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 03:17, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Maurice Kanbar. 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:47, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Maurice Kanbar. 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:27, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Maurice_Kanbar&oldid=1203190352"