Talk:Raffaello Follieri scandal

New Jersey Low‑importance

	New Jersey portal This article is part of WikiProject New Jersey, an effort to create, expand, and improve New Jersey–related articles to Wikipedia feature-quality standard. Please join in the discussion.New JerseyWikipedia:WikiProject New JerseyTemplate:WikiProject New JerseyNew Jersey
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Crime and Criminal Biography Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography 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.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Article title

I consider myself well-informed about current affairs, yet not once during the Follieri affair did I hear it referred to as "Vati-Con." Question whether this entry should simply be titled Raffaelo Follieri, if it even warrants that. If an entry IS warranted, it ought to cover his activities more thoroughly, and not be limited to New Jersey. Avocats (talk) 23:40, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The only place "Vati-Con" is found is in a headline in the NY Post, and this is not in conjunction with the term "scandal" so the title "Vati-Con Scandal" is a synthesis of the two terms. At any rate, I have removed some unreliable sources and a dead external link from this article, and requested a citation for an unsupported fact. I hope some attention can be given to this in the near future. Elizium23 (talk) 17:54, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the above, and this article seems to need a total overhaul, including the title. First, this article has mostly questionable and tabloid sources: New York Post is not a reliable source. Putting together an unsourced price claim with a later Zillow price entry is WP:SYNTH on top of WP:UNREF. Second, the title "Vati-Con scandal" is probably not supported by widespread use. Third, the article seems to be written about everything except the most important topic of the article; I still can't tell what actually happened that counted as "misappropriation", because the article for some reason is very vague, talking about "charges" and "accusations" and "scandal" but not actually explaining what the acts were. That might be because a lot of sources are more fascinated by celebrity connections to Vatican officers and Anne Hathaway than to the actual news. --Closeapple (talk) 05:10, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]