Talk:Lily Safra

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Lily Safra article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
June 20, 2005	Articles for deletion	Kept

A news item involving this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "In the news" column on July 16, 2022.

While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard.

Biography

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Brazil Low‑importance

	Brazil portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brazil, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Brazil and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BrazilWikipedia:WikiProject BrazilTemplate:WikiProject BrazilBrazil articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

European Microstates: Monaco Low‑importance

	Europe portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject European Microstates, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of European Microstates on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.European MicrostatesWikipedia:WikiProject European MicrostatesTemplate:WikiProject European MicrostatesEuropean Microstates articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Monaco portal This article is supported by WikiProject Monaco.

Women's History Low‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Judaism Low‑importance

	Judaism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Judaism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Judaism-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JudaismWikipedia:WikiProject JudaismTemplate:WikiProject JudaismJudaism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Jewish history Low‑importance

	Judaism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Jewish history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Jewish history on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Jewish historyWikipedia:WikiProject Jewish historyTemplate:WikiProject Jewish historyJewish history-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women in Business Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women in Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles about women in business on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women in BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject Women in BusinessTemplate:WikiProject Women in BusinessWomen in Business articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

It is requested that a photograph be included in this article to improve its quality.
The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

Untitled

For the June 2005 deletion debate on this article, see Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Lily Safra.

note how the same user (86.148.61.179) changed both the description of the murder of Edmond as well as Lily's background to change the connotation of the artcile as taken from Domnique Dunne article and the 60 Minutes script. Lets try mainting the correct description of both the murder and the biography so that readers can get the correct facts... only changes with a source will be accepted

Is Lily Safra Jewish? The article does not state it explicitly, but it might be interesting to know.Tsf 14:02, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and what's her maiden name? What's known of her "English" father? 75.3.139.193 (talk) 13:35, 30 June 2008 (UTC)Chicago[reply]

According to the Portuguese page, her full name is Lily Watkins Cohen Monteverde Bendahan Safra, so that I presume that Watkins is her maiden name. Still acoording to the same page, she descends from Russian Jews. Tsf (talk) 18:46, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Her father

I see that, according to one of the entries on this page (above), her father has at some stage been described as "English". The article as it stands now describes him as Czech. I have no independent information on this question. The name "Watkins" sounds English rather than Czech, but could of course have been changed. Nandt1 (talk) 12:06, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

According to trueknowledge.com her father was Polish. Or maybe he was a russian jewish emigre ([1]). Kittybrewster ☎ 09:55, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lady Colin Campbell's "astonishment"

On this aspect, the article, before I edited it, read "To Lady Colin's astonishment, Lily Safra identified with that fictional character." Two issues with this formulation. First, how are we (who are not Lady Colin) to know whether she was or was not indeed astonished? All that we can observe is what she did, said or wrote (or what her lawyers did, said or wrote on her behalf). And so my edit indicates that Lady Colin "expressed" astonishment. Secondly, if -- after reading the article -- you believe that Lady Colin was truly astonished, perhaps you need to get out more? Nandt1 (talk) 12:01, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Censorship, whitewashing and hagiography in this article

It has become clear that this article is repeatedly and rapidly edited to remove any information that could be considered at all critical of its subject, and to focus almost exclusively on her charitable donations and the honours they have brought her. The piece has been turned into a joke. Anyone wishing to read a balanced treatment of this subject should look elsewhere. It has become pointless to continue to try to edit the piece to insert balance, as it is clear that such efforts will be edited away without delay. Instead, the best way to get any value out of the article is to read back over the history of edits to see what the hagiographical school has, over time, cut out (and put in)..... Nandt1 (talk) 21:34, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It would be sad if you were to give up on this. What do you suggest be reviewed with a view to possible reinsertion? Kittybrewster ☎ 09:37, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comment. You might like to see the recent pair of changes for an example. Whoever it is who is (very diligently) censoring the article likes to leave in the statement that Mrs Safra received an apology and the voluntary withdrawal of the book "Empress Bianca" -- but keeps deleting the (sourced) statement that in fact a version of the book was subsequently published and is still widely available. I have tried putting it back in (again!!), but no doubt it will be axed again. I am not sufficiently familiar with Wikipedia's formal procedures to know how one challenges this kind of censorship, which obviously skews this article. References to her third husband have previously been cut out as well, but so far the current reference to that gentleman has survived (for how long?). Nandt1 (talk) 22:32, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As I expected, the reference to the publication of the book in the US has now been deleted yet again. Suggestions? Nandt1 (talk) 13:52, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Stick with it. Don't sweat the small stuff. It could be that the other editor is right on this. Kittybrewster ☎ 13:59, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I have now placed the note (below) on the talk page of the other editor. I would emphasize that the dispute between us centers, according to the other editor's explanation of his/her edits, on the "relevance" of the statements involved, not on their factual accuracy.

"Hello, User 81.200.176.13.

We seem to be reverting each other's edits to the page on Mrs. Lily Safra. My own position is that, if the article enters (as it does) into relatively detailed discussion of the "Empress Bianca" book history, including emphasizing the agreement reached with the UK publisher to withdraw the book from publication, then it is equally relevant and legitimate to add the fact that a revised version of the book did in fact appear in the US. You have now on several occasions deleted various different formulations of this statement.

On the assumption that your motivation is not simply to delete any and all relevant factual material that might conceivably be considered inconvenient to the subject of the article, I would like to propose to you in a constructive spirit that I would be open to considering possible alternative phrasings of the point about the US publication that you might wish to propose. I would, however, oppose anything resembling censorship of a Wikipedia article.

Best wishes to you for a happy 2010. Nandt1 (talk) 14:17, 31 December 2009 (UTC)" Nandt1 (talk) 14:22, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Copy of Exchange from Biography of Living Persons Page

Ths page appears to be repeatedly edited (by a single editor: 81-200-176-13) to remove information that might be considered inconvenient to the subject of the article. Not long ago, the mere existence of her third husband was edited out (though I have re-inserted that reference and -- for now -- it seems to be sticking). The presently-active disagreement relates to the article's coverage of a dispute between Mrs. Safra and Lady Colin Campbell over a novel written by Lady Campbell (Empress Bianca). The article discusses in some detail that fact that, following representations from Mrs Safra's lawyers, the novel's UK publishers issued an apology to Mrs. Safra and withdrew the book from publication. My efforts to add to the section the (well-sourced) information that a revised version of the novel was subsequently published in the US (and is still available) have been repeatedly deleted by User 81.200.176.13, with the statement that the information is "not relevant". I have posted an invitation to seek a negotiated resolution on both the other editor's own page and on the discussion page for the article in question, but have received no response from User 81.200.176.13. 18:29, 4 January 2010 (UTC)Nandt1 (talk) 18:30, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have got to be kidding me. The only reference for this stuff is "www.amazon.com". Thanks for bringing this to our attention -- I have now removed both of the sections related to this issue. They can be readded when someone produces proper sources for them -- do have a look at WP:RS and WP:BLP. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 22:38, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not kidding. But let me try to sure we are all clear about the specific point for which Amazon was used as evidence. The factual point that I sought to establish with my edit was whether the book in question was published on such-and-such a date and whether it is currently available. A listing on Amazon surely provides any reasonable person with precisely this evidence. As to the rest of the story, that was as I found it. Nandt1 (talk) 23:45, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see you've not only edited out the reference to the book -- which was at the center of the dispute -- but also the entire section dealing with all her husband's death as well, which as far as I know was not currently being disputed...?Nandt1 (talk) 23:51, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's correct -- there's no place for unsourced negative material like that. There would be no problem with including it if it can be referenced with proper sources. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 07:55, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ummm, having just said that, I now see that, after a "properly sourced" account of the husband's death was subsequently added to the article, you deleted that too! This time around, you said that it was too much detail on the husband!! I think you may be missing the point that, for 99 percent of readers, it is the husband's prominence, and his very bizarre death, that make Lily Safra newsworthy at all, rather than the many paragraphs of her charitable gifts and awards that you have left alone! This is a ridiculous article and has now been made even sillier. I give up on it. Maybe someone else can now give it a try. Nandt1 (talk) 13:15, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That would be a sadness. Stick with it. You are right in saying that her husband's death made her newsworthy. Also she has recently featured in the news regarding a deposit on a house she has not sold. Kittybrewster ☎ 13:45, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Improving Lily Safra's page

To Nomoskedasticity and other contributors :

Thank you for your feedback on Lily Safra's page about the controversies part. I didn't know that there was a trend away from having such a part.

Though, I think this page must be improved. There's a lot of gossips on it (a lot of informations are coming from a fictionnal book or a non official - and controversial - biography), surrounded by a flood of laudatory informations that really should be more neutral.

The point of making a "controversies part" was to clear the page a bit, before making several improvements. What would you suggest ? Let's give a try to make a worthly and objective Wikipedia page for Lily Safra at last. (Lightsword (talk) 20:44, 4 November 2010 (UTC))[reply]

If you think there is scope for improvements here, perhaps you could suggest specific improvements, one at a time. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 12:29, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've made some changes to the page. According to the policies WP:CHALLENGE and WP:BURDEN, the parts i've removed should be correctly sourced (especially because they sound like gossips). Inline citations should be added and the references should be precised by the editor of this content. (Lightsword (talk) 21:19, 9 November 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Whoa -- hang on there, cowboy -- those parts did have a reference: they were all sourced to the book by Isabel Vincent, Gilded Lily. What exactly is amiss here, in your view? Nomoskedasticity (talk) 21:22, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe i've been a bit direct! But my view here is that we had before some parts with several sentences, expressing the most disputed ideas on all the page, proved only by one book : Isabel Vincent, Gilded Lily, and there's neither inline citation nor page number. That's a bit weak, don't you think ? Usually, on other pages, this kind of material is justified with several books/articles, etc. (Lightsword (talk) 07:50, 10 November 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Ah -- well, no, it isn't weak, it's entirely normal, I see no reason to doubt that source. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 20:16, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on Lily Safra. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 5 June 2024).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:32, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Lily Safra. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20121106051752/http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-109684267.html to http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-109684267.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 5 June 2024).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 12:33, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Lily Safra. 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: 5 June 2024).

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) 22:41, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lily Safra. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111102064120/http://www.hopeandhomes.org/aboutus/index.html to http://www.hopeandhomes.org/aboutus/index.html

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 16:12, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Lily Safra. 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: 5 June 2024).

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) 08:52, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]