Talk:Sergey Brin/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Page is anti- USSR?

This page has several pieces of irrelevant information, such as mentioning obscure anecdotes that don't actually contain technical information, this page needs a serious revamp and tone-down. The writing in said pieces of irrelevant information is also terrible(contains lots of weasel words such as "but in reality") and needs to re-done. This page ultimately talks more about USSR and Jews than Sergey Brin, that needs to be fixed. All of the cited sources for the said irrelevant information and obscure anecdotes come from some random unknown Jewish media newspaper, so who even knows how reliable THAT is? It's fine to mention a few details, but this is dominating the article and that should be changed. Shogunpk (talk) 10:27, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

• Disagree

Your continual deletion of biographical and fully cited facts are made without valid cause. All of the details you deleted are from verifiable sources and cited, such as The Economist. Your personal opinions are fine for this discussion section but you have not given any valid reasons for removing those biographical facts. If anything, you are showing why they are probably relevant. Removing facts from a biography that you personally find offensive may be considered a form of censorship.

The snippet you gave as an example for your opinion, "but in reality," besides being petty, is verbatim from the source listed. You then try to undermine the source with more opinions, "... obscure anecdotes come from some random unknown Jewish media newspaper, so who even knows how reliable THAT is?" You try to justify your censorship by using extremely biased statements.

You delete facts you don't like by calling them "irrelevant," but in reality, this is an example of censorship, supported by your obvious bias, and not acceptable. I would kindly ask that you replace all biographical facts improperly removed. Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 19:58, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

-- There is definitely a valid cause, it's NOT the fact that I find it so offensive, I couldn't care less, it's the fact that when I want to read about Sergey Brin, I'm instead reading nonsense about how Jews couldn't get high profile jobs in the USSR, when you read about a prominent black musician who grew up in the 1950s, does the article talk more about segregation and discrimination against blacks in the USA than the black musician? No, that is why I have a problem with these anecdotes and very sloppy writing, it should be toned down and cut very much down, it currently takes up maybe almost 3/4 of the page so that's ridiculous. PS. Don't trash my talk page by accusing me on censorship when that's clearly not the case, you're not a moderator so you probably shouldn't act like one. If you want to talk so much about that subject, there's an antisemitism article for a reason. I would feel the same amount of annoyance if this article talked about how Sergey loves pancakes, filled with anecdotes about him making pancakes, taking up 3/4 of the article as much as this. Shogunpk ([[User talk:Shogunpk|talk]]) 21:28, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Reply

Since you deleted cited and relevant bio infomation with the comment, "add more technical information(such as the yr he moved to U.S)," I'll assume you didn't get a chance to read the article or the cites first, otherwise you wouldn't have deleted the date he moved to the U.S. For your benefit, here are a few sections from those. I also wasn't sure what kind of additional "technical information" you were looking for, so I highlighted a few details that you can add back in.

from The Economist, From Russia with maths

Mr Brin’s faith in the transformative power of knowledge also has personal roots. He was born in the Soviet Union, an opaque society and one often hostile to his Jewish parents. His father, Michael, wanted to be an astronomer, but Russia’s Communists barred Jews from the physics and astronomy departments at universities. So Michael Brin became a mathematician, as his father had been. This too was difficult for Jews, who had to take special, more difficult entrance exams. Both Michael and Eugenia passed nonetheless.

"But it was clear that they had to get out to lead fulfilling lives. They applied for an exit visa in 1978. Michael Brin was fired for it, and his wife resigned. Fortunately, they received their visas, and in 1979 emigrated to America. Sergey was six at the time."

from Moment magazine,

For many Soviet Jews, exit visas never came. But, in May 1979, the Brins were granted papers to leave the U.S.S.R. “We hoped it would happen,” Genia says, “but we were completely surprised by how quickly it did.” The timing was fortuitous: They were among the last Jews allowed to leave until the Gorbachev era."

Sergey, who turned six that summer, remembers what followed as simply “unsettling”—literally so. “We were in different places from day to day,” he says. The journey was a blur. First Vienna, where the family was met by representatives of HIAS, the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, which helped thousands of Eastern European Jews establish new lives in the free world. Then, on to the suburbs of Paris, where Michael’s “unofficial” Jewish Ph.D. advisor, Anatole Katok, had arranged a temporary research position for him at the Institut des Hautes Etudes Scientifiques. Katok, who had emigrated the year before with his family, looked after the Brins and paved the way for Michael to teach at Maryland."

When the family finally landed in America on October 25, they were met at New York’s Kennedy Airport by friends from Moscow. Sergey’s first memory of the United States was of sitting in the backseat of the car, amazed at all the giant automobiles on the highway as their hosts drove them home to Long Island."

The Brins found a house to rent in Maryland—a simple, cinder-block structure in a lower-middle-class neighborhood not far from the university campus. With a $2,000 loan from the Jewish community, they bought a 1973 Ford Maverick. And, at Katok’s suggestion, they enrolled Sergey in Paint Branch Montessori School in Adelphi, Maryland."

As for your suggestion that the article be toned down, you'll discover from reading the full articles cited, that it was toned down, and a lot of the relevant details were left out to keep the article focused. There are many other sources and quotes about his life, including the expatriate organization you added, that could have been used. And there are many other emigre stories and bios that could be linked to support the causes, risks, and significance of a family's decision to leave the home of their birth.

You should therefore be adding cited facts you feel are relevant instead of just deleting facts you don't like by calling them a "smear." Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 23:17, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

---

Look, it doesn't matter whether I said it was a smear or not, that was my first opinion, at this point I don't like it because it takes up 3/4th of the article, as I said before, if you replaced all of that text with anecdotes about how Brin loves pancakes and his experience with them, I'd be just as upset; just reduce the amount of text used from those articles so it doesn't turn into an article revolving around antisemitism , if you want an article revolving around that, then go to the antisemitism article!Shogunpk (talk) 03:26, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Will no one stop this?

Will no one stop wikiwatcher? He's constantly adding in garbage from stupid magazines(poor source) into the article, read above as to why I'm upset about this, it ultimately goes down to that it takes up too much of the article, it needs to cut down, tone down, etc, it feels like it almost takes up 3/4 of the article right now, I feel like I'm reading an article about antisemitism in the USSR instead of Sergey Brin, if he wants that, he can go write in the antisemitism article! I've already asked him to tone it down, cut it down, etc, he won't accept and just reverts everything, I wanted it to be gone until he can cut it down and tone it down and then add it back in, but he refuses and this essentially starts a revert war. Shogunpk (talk) 01:13, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

This is not simply a "revert war." When an editor uses good sources to improve an article, it's a matter of simple truth and facts. When another editor does not like those truths and facts, takes it personally, and simply deletes them, that's a serious breach of Npov. No one has prevented you from finding equally valid sources to contribute, refute, or expand.

One more point. I just recently started researching and editing this article. There are many more facts that I expect to obtain to enhance the biography of this very important person whose bio is not yet even rated. It's true that I started mostly with his early life as that's generally the way I think - linear. But I'll be adding a lot more details to his education in the U.S., how he got involved in search engine systems, how they turned it into Google, his current personal interests and activities, especially his google.org and his involvment with alternative energy. You'll notice I added a few quotes after watching some lengthy video presentations, for instance. That kind of research takes time, but I'm trying to get more quotes with more effort.

I agree that because I started with his childhood, and rounded off the lead which was too short, it is proportionately more detailed than other areas. But it won't be forever. It will eventually be a balanced article that I think you'll like. In the meantime, I think it would be great if you helped find some more bio details yourself to keep it moving. Most of the articles I work on eventually get to be about three times longer than this one, so there's a lot we can do. Can you help? Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 06:09, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Sure, I'm willing to help if you agree with me that there is too much area concentrated about Jews and the USSR, a few lines of text are fine, but you've essentially used a few paragraphs which is too much considering there's more content about that than other more important things such as the development of google and how it came to be, which should be prioritized. I'm also willing to help if you stop claiming I am not maintaining a NPOV, when I have in fact only omitted the top sentences in the article, but left the later content which practically said the same thing, like I said if it were all about pancakes I'd feel the same about this; I'd feel the article has too much about him and his love for pancakes, and therefore needs to be cut down, and language to be toned down if necessary(other articles have toned down direct material from magazines before because of language issue). Sorry to make this such a big issue but I'm tired of it taking such a big chunk of the article, it's nothing personal. I also think you should stop posting pseudo warnings on my page. Shogunpk (talk) 06:30, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Immigration/emigration

Does the phrase "His parents immigrated to the United States" imply that the reader is also in the united states? 87.194.198.122 (talk) 18:01, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Fixed. Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 21:15, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Wealth Estimation

I don't know who keeps changing the number of billions he's worth, but it isn't $8.7 I can assure you that. Yes the stock has dropped but not nearly for him to lose over $10 billion in the past few months or even year. Forbes recently released the 2008 US edition of the 400 richest people in America. He and his co founder Larry Page were worth roughly $15.8, not $8.7 Someone please change that.

Lead section

Can the lead be worked on. I haven't been here in awhile, but it seems to have gotten totally out of hand. I have trimmedit a bit, but a consise lead hitting the main points, with the meat left for the main body of the article would work much better it seems. --Tom 15:55, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Per WP:Lead, the sections you "trimmed a bit" seemed to meet all guidelines and stated purposes for a proper lead. Much of it included general quotations from "The Economist" magazine, which is a leading international and general interest news source. Its content is considered extremely reliable as a reference.

Per WP:Lead, The lead should be able to stand alone as a concise overview of the article. It should establish context, explain why the subject is interesting or notable, and summarize the most important points—including any notable controversies that may exist. The emphasis given to material in the lead should roughly reflect its importance to the topic, according to reliable, published sources, and the notability of the article's subject should be established in the first sentence of the lead. While consideration should be given to creating interest in reading more of the article, the lead nonetheless should not "tease" the reader by hinting at—but not explaining—important facts that will appear later in the article. The lead should contain no more than four paragraphs, should be carefully sourced as appropriate, and should be written in a clear, accessible style to invite a reading of the full article.

As for sources for his early life that you noted, there are others which cover the same material, and I'm sure you could add to them easily. The Malseed book, being a published book focusing on Google and its founders, is a highly credible reference, and probably better than magazines, newspapers, or blogs. Whether the section needs trimming could be brought up for general comment but I feel it should include specifics. Note that in relation to the full Malseed article, the "Early life" section is compressed, readable, and relevant.

Overall, this is not a very long article compared to other bios - Bob Dylan for example - and I'm sure it will grow with time. Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 20:22, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Look at other bios, like Larry Page. The minutia(sp?) is not needed. Maybe draft a lead for the talk, but way to much as it was. --Tom 15:25, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikiwatcher1, I will try to add a rewrite draft here shortly. Maybe you could do the same. As it is, "your" version is longer than Obama's intro, really not needed. What do others think? --Tom 19:15, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

You're right about Page. I would treat it as an opportunity to find and add reliable facts to his obviously too short bio. This is more useful that needlessly shortening other bios to match an obviously too short one, don't you think? You're clearly interested enough in these bios to watch them attentively. Your rationale for consistently removing sourced facts en masse from a bio with your simple "still not needed..." comment is beyond rational and not constructive. Please read Wiki's written purposes for a lead and talk about those, - before simply removing facts.

There's at least one simple reason for providing a clear and detailed lead:

co-founder of Google, Inc., the world’s largest internet company, based on its search engine and online advertising technology. In 2007 he and co-founder Larry Page were together ranked #1 of the “50 Most Important People on the Web” by PC World Magazine.

As for his profession and being an American, you will need to provide explanations for those kinds of unexplainable changes. Is it customary to add "American" in front of any bio for a person living in the U.S.? As for his commonly known profession, why delete it? Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 19:24, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

I added a fact tag for his occupation and also see WP:MOSBIO for nationality which should be included in the lead sentence. I understand that he was born in Russia, but still it should be addressed. I will not revert again for now, but hopefully others will chime in, especially with the blind reverts you are doing. --Tom 19:30, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

I won't revert again for now, but will try to work on a compromise lead. Does anybody else want to comment or try to rewrite the lead? Thanks, --Tom 23:03, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Straw poll

Use Short Lead:

• Short and sweet :) --Tom 19:27, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

* I agree with Tom. I hate the old expression but I think its relevant. An intro should be like a woman's skirt - long enough to cover the basics, but short enough to keep us interested. I5kfun (talk) 03:14, 5 February 2009 (UTC) Use Long Lead:

Rewrite lead in between these two:

• What was taken out by Tom [1] should be rewritten in a more lead-manner-style. It is mostly lead material but not written as such since the introduction should be a condensed version of the article and details are and should be given in the main body.--The Magnificent Clean-keeper (talk) 01:50, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Reasonable suggestions. I'll try a rewrite myself since I helped on it and will post here. Anyone else's rewrites can also be added here for comments before replacing existing lead intro. This should be more conducive to productive collaboration and improvement as opposed to a drive-by editor hacking off 85% from an introduction and saying they "trimmed a bit." Thanks for feedback. Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 02:21, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Drive by? That is not needed. I have edited this article going back three years. Yourself?? I do agree that more imput would be useful.--Tom 13:34, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Lets try to keep it nice people. You can disagree without being disagreeable. Wikiwatcher, please note "Civility is one of wikipedia's core principles"

When I started adding to the article two months ago it was 15 kbs long - it's now over 24 kbs. I assume we can agree that bio improvements are usually best done with a scalpel instead of a chainsaw? -- Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 20:07, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Please do not assume anything with me, thank you. I've had to use much more than a chainsaw on occaision.--Tom 20:12, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

:::That assumption is not valid in all cases. If there are any unsourced materials in bio they need to be cut down asap, and for that the only thing that can do the trick is a chainsaw. If the unsourced material is potentially libelous then you need to get out some bombers and napalm it. I5kfun (talk) 03:14, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Valid points - that's why I said "usually." -- Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 04:06, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

(outdent) I5kfun, I usually use the term "nuke" but didn't :). Actually, the "material" in question here was not libelous, just a bit much for the LEAD, imho. Do we need to get into the two founders being "soul mates" in the lead and mutliple quotations from whom exactly?? Again, the lead could easily be 1/3 the size and still hit the highlights of the article. Lets meet in the middle. I still need to craft something as a compromise. Anyways, --Tom 12:43, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

:Although probably added in good faith one could look at "soul mate" as a weasel word implying something about the sexuality of the subject in question, a potentially libelous thing to add to a living persons bio. Therefore I think it should be nuked out of the lead. On principle I agree that the intro is far too long.I5kfun (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 16:20, 5 February 2009 (UTC).

Mark Malseed, author of The Google Story

This was discussed above, but the weight given to this book seems much. Almost all of the early life section are quotes from this author? This material could be covered in a more consise manner it seems. --Tom 16:12, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Google or sergy?

Is this an article about google or about Sergey, I really couldn't tell. I help a bit by removing stuff about google books. MorningYoga (talk) 04:05, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Good question. It seems to me that after a company's products have been developed and are widely used, discussing that product is more related to the company itself. But I think when a very new product or service, like Google Books, has been conceived by its founders, and is still being developed, quotes and descriptions about it are of interest as part of its creator's bio. That could include how and why they felt the product would be useful to the public, or world - their motivation or philosophy. It's interesting to know what a founder of anything new was thinking when they created it - to share in their idea stage.

IMO, bios about famous people, especially inventors of things like the telephone, photography, or even microchips, will always include discussions about how their inventions became incorporated into the general market and used by the public. Personally, because so few people know about Google Books yet, including a brief discussion about it here is OK. --Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 06:28, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

My two cents would address undue weight. Maybe a short mention if it is relevant to the section it is going in, but I would not include a full blown disertation about it, that would belong in the google article, this is a bio about the man. I also remove a little bit about this from the lead, definately not needed there. I still need to craft a rewrite of the lead, but haven't done so, not such a biggie after further thought. Wikiwatcher1, I appreciate your efforts, but just disagree with the "volume" of your additions if that makes any sense, probably not :), anyways, cheers, --Tom 14:07, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Archive 1

Archive 2

Infobox caption

My edit summary got cut off, but I meant to say that it's not promotion. Wearing those unusual shoes is something Brin is widely known for. See news reports devoted solely to his footwear like this and this. Steven Walling 23:03, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Understood. But he's also known for wearing jeans and T-shirts. It might fit somewhere in the personal life section, but it's inappropriate in the lead caption. It doesn't have to be intended as promo to be promo. A photo of him sitting in boat shouldn't include the boat brand, or car model if he's next to one. --Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 23:21, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

We're not talking about absurd hypotheticals here. We're talking about something multiple reliable sources have given exclusive coverage to, and people are going to wonder about the weird shoes when they see the portrait. Captions are for explaining this kind of thing. Steven Walling 23:38, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

If part of the image is weird and needs to be explained, it probably shouldn't be in the lead. The earlier one was a portrait, this one is a candid with an unintended focus on the bottom of his feet, and not really an improved image overall. So having to explain what's on his feet is silly. I'd crop the photo or use the earlier one.--Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 00:01, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Having a current photo that isn't fuzzy like the previous one was is important, which is why I added it. It doesn't have an unintended focus on the feet, it just has something that needs a caption. What's your problem with giving a rich description of a better image? How does it hurt the biography to have a quality lead image, and one that displays a part of Sergey's personality that has gotten media attention? Steven Walling 01:10, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Because its, ah, stupid. Sorry to be blunt. Do you have some agenda here? If not, please do not readd. --Tom (talk) 01:31, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Better yet, can we just get a "normal" lead photo and be done here? As suggested above, his "notable" footwear can go under an entire clothing section, knock yourself out. This article is already a disaster, why make it worse? --Tom (talk) 01:37, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

It was a heck of lot worse a little over a year ago, IMO. --Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 01:44, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

ok, i will strike my comment above. Its not a total disaster, but I do think there is too much detail(unsourced) in certain areas, if that is possible...anyways, --Tom (talk) 01:59, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

If most people don't want it, I won't readd it (of course). But that doesn't give you any reason to act like a smarmy asshole Tom. Steven Walling 21:12, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

I missed that personal attack. Coming from an admin, thats pretty pathetic. --Tom (talk) 23:58, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism

I noticed the page was missing (2010-04-10 00.27 UTC +10.00) I did my best to restore (first time doing) Sorry for any mistakes Felipe1982 (talk) 14:28, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Untitled

Is it true that he's David Brin's cousin? no --207.99.73.226 16:25, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

about Brin's Blog :: www.searchguild.com/googleblog/ is this Brin's blog?

• hoax abakharev 05:54, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
• His actual personal blog is http://too.blogspot.com/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.239.45.4 (talk) 20:10, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

I am not familiar with biographies. Is it worth mentioning his appearence on the gameshow "To Tell The Truth" on GSN where a celebrity panel tried to guess which was the real Sergey by asking questions to Sergey and two other "imposters". Not really an award but is a Television appearance where they recognized him for his achievements. Brinkley32 (talk) 19:10, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Brin's philanthropy

Google co-founder Brin gives $1 million to HIAS Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society - "HIAS was one of the groups that helped Brin's family when it fled the Soviet Union 30 years ago." Also notes that not only are his parents Jewish but he is as well -- so is Larry Page apparently. See this article in the Jerusalem Post. Stellarkid (talk) 00:18, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

"The Brin Wojcicki Foundation, started by Google co-founder Sergey Brin and 23andMe co-founder Anne Wojcicki, awarded a $500,000 grant to the Wikimedia Foundation" [2] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.239.45.4 (talk) 20:14, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Website

Should the website link to a similar page like Larry Pages--88.111.116.197 (talk) 22:14, 21 November 2011 (UTC)--88.111.116.197 (talk) 22:14, 21 November 2011 (UTC)--88.111.116.197 (talk) 22:14, 21 November 2011 (UTC)--22:14, 21 November 2011 (UTC)88.111.116.197 (talk)

"Sergey Brin was born in Moscow to Christian parents,"

How does that make him Jewish? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.180.184.68 (talk) 15:18, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Info Box

Is Sergey Brin's ethnicity really relevant information? Shouldn't citizenship status be enough in that area? I do not find it in the info boxes of other similar celebrities, as Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Steve Wozniak. 62North (talk) 04:18, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Plus, it is wrong. His ethnicity should state Jewish, not Russian — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.131.12.89 (talk) 06:09, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Image of Sergey Brin

Do you guys like the current image, or the previous one? It's pretty hard to find good images that are CC/CCSA licensed. - M0rphzone (talk) 05:00, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

The current image in yellow is a blurry snapshot. The previous ones are both better. Especially for the lead, there's no reason for a fuzzy 2008 snapshot over a 2010 one, IMO. --Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 00:37, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

I don't know if you didn't see this comment that I specifically made after I changed the image, or you did see it, but thanks for replying. - M0rphzone (talk) 01:46, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 3 December 2012

Please add the Bloomberg Billionaires Index reference to the first paragraph after the following sentence:

...Russian-born American computer scientist and Internet entrepreneur who, with Larry Page, co-founded Google, one of the most profitable Internet companies...

As of October 2012, his personal wealth is estimated to be $20.6 billion "Bloomberg Billionares Index". Bloomberg LP. {{cite web}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help); Check date values in: |accessdate= (help); Missing or empty |url= (help); Missing pipe in: |accessdate= (help) . Previously, Forbes listed $20.3 billion as his networth.[2] CubanellePep (talk) 13:43, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Not done: Information like this is already in article, and doesn't belong in lede in this fashion. gwickwire^talk_edits 01:26, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Childhood in the Soviet Union

The section entitled "Childhood in the Soviet Union" is horrible. Obviously inclined against the life in the Soviet Union, it should be rewritten in a less confrontational style. I'll put the POV template to mark the section until the changes will be made.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:34, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

When posting a NPOV tag, the one posting is required to "clearly and exactly explain which part of the article does not seem to have a NPOV and why," per POV guidelines. This should include stating why the quotes or cited sources are not acceptable, or else providing other sources to balance what you see as unbalanced. --Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 18:04, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Regarding the text in the noted section, there is a clear off-topic text indirectly concentrated on the social, political and economic situation in the Soviet Union. I don't mean it's insane and should be removed, but it would be great to shorten the text and put it in general, why the family left the Soviet Union. Some parts are written in arrogant style, referenced with a story in the Moment magazine, which receives critics for its provocative stories like this. Hence, the main reason for the unbalanced content and the need of the POV template should be the inappropriate source.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 20:59, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Your opinion on this is clear, since it's fine to say you think a source is "inappropriate." But saying the references, as used, are "arrogant," "unbalanced," "inappropriate," "receives critics" and is "off-topic" needs support, not your personal opinion. Same is true with your example of a "provocative" story, which if anything, seems to support why the childhood material is probably relevant and accurate.--Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 01:03, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

If you consider the following magazine a right solution to reference the text in the article, especially when attached with its successive stories about how bad where Jews treated in the East European countries, and how they attained peace in the United States, you probably have a stance which is far from the neutral point of view. We're not here to write whether the stories tell the truth or not, but to analyze whether the source is relevant or not. My insight is that it favors the refugees (especially Jewish) in the United States, underrating the life in the previous countries. But you're still right when asking for any support and opinions of other users, and I'm pleased to wait for a while to see anybody else commenting about this. Best regards.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 21:11, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

The support needed is your own explanation of why a source is "arrogant," for example. It doesn't add anything to have someone else say they agree that a source is "arrogant," since two opinions are still "opinions," and opinions are rarely neutral. Another matter which you haven't mentioned is that most of the quotes given are not by the magazine, but from Sergey Brin, or his family. So if you're claiming that those quotations are imbalanced or were never stated, then you should make that clear. In any case, this is a bio of one person; there are hundreds of similar bios of other immigrants of all nationalities or religions. It is part of their bio only, and there is no logical reason why they should include similar stories of other immigrants to be "balanced." If you feel that the bio is "underrating the life in the previous countries" they moved from, you should simply add cited material explaining that. --Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 21:58, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Well, I propose to move on and change the matter, so we can remove the POV template to end this discussion. The text within the section is concerned too much with the social and economic situation in the Soviet Union rather than Sergey's childhood, his education and main interests as child. In many other articles the lack of such facts is not substituted with such off-topic text. Thus, it does not fix the problem of the size of the article. Finally, shortening the section would amend the matter and inserting the reference bar to the magazine story only once would surely be more reliable than it is now.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 23:13, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

P.S.In this shape, the section would be better for the article about the Brin family.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 23:16, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

[outdent] OK, I agree that this is more of an editing subject than POV, as Brin and his family are allowed to describe their lives. But where is this excessive concern with the "social and economic situation in the Soviet Union" you mention? If it's there, it can easily be trimmed or rephrased as off-topic. As for other cites and quotes about his childhood in Russia, feel free to add any. But the article doesn't mention anything about his family as "refugees." If they were refugees, as you stated, then obviously a description is valuable and probably required. But as it is now, a few paragraphs quoting his family's reasons for emigrating is not off-topic.--Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 01:12, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

It is not mentioned that they were refugees, but the logical conclusion of the sentence: "Brin claims Communist Party heads barred Jews from upper professional ranks by denying them entry to universities" convinced me think that they were repressed by the Communist party as Jews. Let me start by noting the parts which I consider not necessary:

• The following part is not needed in the article, since it deals with the treatment of the Jews in the Soviet Union.

Although an official policy of anti-Semitism didn't exist in the Soviet Union, Brin claims Communist Party heads barred Jews from upper professional ranks by denying them entry to universities; "Jews were excluded from the physics departments, in particular..." Michael Brin therefore changed his major to mathematics where he received nearly straight A's. However, he said, "Nobody would even consider me for graduate school because I was Jewish."

• The following is more convenient, especially the last two sentences, but Iit would better to shorten the first part, since it is not directly concerned with Sergey, but to the Brin family:

Sergey's mother was less willing to leave their home in Moscow, where they had spent their entire lives. Malseed writes, "For Genia, the decision ultimately came down to Sergey. While her husband admits he was thinking as much about his own future as his son's, for her, 'it was 80/20' about Sergey." They formally applied for their exit visa in September 1978, and as a result his father "was promptly fired". For related reasons, his mother also had to leave her job. For the next eight months, without any steady income, they were forced to take on temporary jobs as they waited, not knowing whether their application would be granted. During this time his parents shared responsibility for looking after him and his father taught himself computer programming. In May 1979, they were granted their official exit visas and were allowed to leave the country.

• I would remove the text bellow rather than shortening or rewriting it, since there is nowhere to start and fix it. What is the idea behind these statements? How to define "impulse on confronting Soviet oppression had been to throw pebbles at a police car"?

At an interview in October, 2000, Brin said, "I know the hard times that my parents went through there, and am very thankful that I was brought to the States." A decade earlier, in the summer of 1990, a few weeks before his 17th birthday, his father led a group of gifted high school math students, including Sergey, on a two-week exchange program to the Soviet Union. "As Sergey recalls, the trip awakened his childhood fear of authority" and he remembers that his first "impulse on confronting Soviet oppression had been to throw pebbles at a police car." Malseed adds, "On the second day of the trip, while the group toured a sanitarium in the countryside near Moscow, Sergey took his father aside, looked him in the eye and said, 'Thank you for taking us all out of Russia.'"

In this shape, the section seems to be an interview with Sergey and Michael about Srgey's childhood in the Soviet Union rather than an encyclopedic content of the entitled topic.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:16, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

You wrote earlier, "The text within the section is concerned too much with the social and economic situation in the Soviet Union rather than Sergey's childhood . . ." Now you seem to be saying the opposite, that "the section seems to be an interview with Sergey and Michael about Sergey's childhood in the Soviet Union . . . ." In any case, direct quotations are considered a "primary" source of information, and here, as you agree, they are about his childhood. You also say that the descriptions are "not directly concerned with Sergey, but to the Brin family," and suggest removing quotes about his parents: his father "admits he was thinking as much about his own future as his son's, for her, 'it was 80/20' about Sergey." It's clearly on-topic to his childhood.

But I agree that it might be off-topic to discuss "social and economic situation in the Soviet Union," and kindly request again that you point those out. --Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 21:03, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Excuse me, but you avoided to answer completely. I understand your wish to justify the source, but the section in the given shape could not be. Maybe I'm not right in something, but as a whole text, it is not completely well covered. The quote: "impulse on confronting Soviet oppression had been to throw pebbles at a police car." is well cited and maybe is true, but I don't see why it should be in the article, what is related with his childhood here, and what does Soviet opression mean? There is also: "On the second day of the trip, while the group toured a sanitarium in the countryside near Moscow, Sergey took his father aside, looked him in the eye and said, 'Thank you for taking us all out of Russia.'", which repeats the displeasure of the life in Soviet Union again.

In only few sentences you can learn these things about the Soviet Union:

1. The Communist Party of the Soviet Union barred the Jews, who did not have a chance for promotion.
2. If you had applied for an exit visa, you would get fired for that and you should have worked many jobs in a short term.
3. In 1990 nothing did change in Moscow after a whole decade.

To find all these things in a biographic article is too strange.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 22:31, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

And that's all incorrect views btw. Jews had a chance for promotion, but supposedly this chance was lesser than that of other ethnicities. Most Soviet citizens worked at one job and were happy with it. 1990 was the 5th year of perestroika and many things changed by that time. The society became more free but the economy degraded, and the latter might have been a more serious reason for being grateful for not living in the Soviey Union anymore. GreyHood ^Talk 23:10, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

As for the issue itself, we can't of course remove the personal views expressed by Brin or his family just on the basis of their anti-Soviet stance or their confrontational style and their incorrectness in the larger context. But I believe some attempts can be made to render these views in a more neutral and brief manner. The section seems to be based mostly on the Story of Sergey Brin, and I believe this book can contain much more interesting facts on Brin's childhood than the history of Jews prosecution, fear of authority etc. Afterall, Brin lived with his own dear family and must have had some happy moments too. GreyHood ^Talk 23:10, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

In reply to Kiril, I think seeing 1 & 2 is reasonable, as the history of Soviet-era refuseniks is known. But arriving at #3 is more POV. I think from the U.S. perspective the opposite is mostly believed to be true. It also might help to realize that most of the U.S. population was formed by immigrants from around the globe, and Soviet immigrants to the U.S. are just one group. The article cited, Moments, includes a lengthy section about "The history of Russian Jewish emigration," while the few sentences you mention are simply snippets from his own perspective. If the anecdote of his minor rock-throwing urge was trimmed, then the statement that the "trip awakened his childhood fear of authority" would be incomplete, IMO. --Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 23:48, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Since you (Wikiwatcher1) start to work on amending the section by mentioning refuseniks, I feel more comfortable to keep up and end the discussion. It would be more common to say that his parents were refuseniks rather than detailing the conditions in which they were. Also, I'm not anybody who lives in a country of the former Soviet Union nor in the United States, and I proposed the discussion, because my first insight when reading was that something is not in order with the text. I see another user discussing and I regard his opinion as well. There should be more facts about his happy moments with the family. Best regards.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 15:58, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

P.S. I missed another huge thing to mention. The user above denies the things which apparently are in the article and are mainly quotes. Since this is article about Sergey Brin, it is not a place where his stances about the Soviet Union and the life there should be mentioned. I repeat again my wish to trim it with "relatively" more facts rather than quotes of his opinions.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 16:06, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

I ve red the article and I am disappointed with all this Americanism in it.This article wants to show us that USA is heaven on earth, some promised land or something like that, and that the USSR was hell for people who lived in it. An interview pulled out of a cheap tabloid newspapers as a source, well that's just sad... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.216.236.245 (talk) 02:25, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I am not sure what this paragraph from the section has to do with his "childhood in USSR":

'In the summer of 1990, a few weeks before his 17th birthday, his father led a group of high school math students, including Sergey, on a two-week exchange program to the Soviet Union. "As Sergey recalls, the trip awakened his childhood fear of authority" and he remembered that his first "impulse on confronting Soviet oppression had been to throw pebbles at a police car". Malseed adds, "On the second day of the trip, while the group toured a sanitarium in the countryside near Moscow, Sergey took his father aside, looked him in the eye and said, 'Thank you for taking us all out of Russia.'"'

To my mind, nothing at all. It rather belongs to a section (for now non-existent) on his personal views.

Also, I think the section fails to render its content in a neutral tone, that is only as a set of (first of all) facts of his life and also possibly of Sergey's and his parents' memory recordings, but not as the editor's point of view. For example, in the first paragraph the word 'explain' was used in a way discouraged by the guidelines. I think there are more things that contribute to the mentioned feeling of bias, but it would take a literary critic to understand them all. - 89.110.5.51 (talk) 10:31, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

For one thing, the titles of the two sections imply unnecessary confrontation because of their syntactic parallelism, and they contribute to heating: they imply comparison of the two countries instead of simply addressing different stages of Sergey Brin's life. I suggest to rename the titles to "Early years" and "Education": these names are neutral. Where he lived during these stages of his life can well be said inside the sections ("Sergey Brin was born to ..." etc etc). (By the way, the lengths of the two sections are disproportional: years of education are more important than early years of childhood, yet the second section is smaller than the first; this should be the other way around, and I hope that the cause of the current state of affairs is not a lack of sources).

Another trait that needs fix is composition of the sections. A first sentence for a section is usually perceived as either describing the most early events or as telling the most important details. In the section that we discuss, the first sentence immediately tells that Sergey Brin, when he was six, was "compelled to leave USSR". This detail of his life can well be true, but putting it first reflects the editor's point of view that this is the most important thing that can be said of Sergey Brin's early life; this is why other editors perceived this article as "tabloid"-like: it makes some details look more important over others without giving it prior consideration. Instead, the section should run in chronological order in order to avoid bias.

I hope these pieces of analysis are helpful. Please note that I need collaboration in the work of turning the article into a neutral one, as I cannot edit the article myself – both because of lack of my English skills and because I do not orientate myself in the body of the sources on the topic. I need assistance from the past contributors of this article. — (still me) 89.110.18.61 (talk) 22:45, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

You brought up some good points worth looking at more closely. The first one, about a paragraph describing his visit to Russia, is that it could go into a whole new section called "personal views." However, it doesn't seem that his few comments are enough for a separate section. In any case, his views are really memory statements referring to his childhood, and are in context to his childhood.

The two sections under his "early life," Childhood in the Soviet Union, and Education in the United States are written in a parallel way, but they read as simple factual statements, not as confrontations or comparisons, and without any perceived bias. I've seen many bios where the city, state, or country is included in a title. For example, Charlie Chaplin, "Move to Switzerland," Stanley Kubrick, "Settling in the United Kingdom," Albert Einstein, "Emigration to U.S. in 1933" and Marc Chagall, "Art career" subsections: Russia (1906–1910), France (1910–1914), Russia and Soviet Belarus (1914–1922), France (1923–1941), Escaping occupied France, America (1941–1948), France (1948–1985).

You're right that there could be more background about his education. Maybe there weren't enough published details to add more. The childhood section is for Brin more detailed than most bios, probably because the sources interviewed his family about their immigration. If you can point to some more education sources, they could also be included to balance the material.

The section on his "childhood" does start with another fact, that his family emigrated, and is followed with text giving reasons why they emigrated. Whether or not it was the "most important thing that can be said of Sergey Brin's early life," is unknown, but it was obviously important. But including the fact of their emigration first allows the rest of the material to read more easily which gives background to their move. If the statement was put at the end, to stay chronological, then the section might have been too dramatic, with life details leading to a conclusion. That might add a bias to the section, making it read more like some kind of escape story.

It's also possible that there is a natural non-neutral aspect to a person's life when their family felt "compelled" to move due to hardship in their homeland. Some, like Chagall and Einstein, moved or emigrated to save their life, for instance, and details about their moves would likely be very non-neutral. Anyway, those are just my personal opinions, and others may have more to add. --Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 04:52, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

false statement that :" at Moscow State University, Jews were required to take their entrance exams in different rooms than non-Jewish applicants, which were nicknamed "gas chambers", and they were marked on a harsher scale."

So, despite I explained that the following statement is false -" According to Brin, at Moscow State University, Jews were required to take their entrance exams in different rooms than non-Jewish applicants, which were nicknamed "gas chambers", and they were marked on a harsher scale." - it is restored by moderator. Ofcource you may claim that it is opinion of mr. Brin (Seregy's father), but the fact is that facts reported in this quote are not true - Yes, I can understand mr. Brin's (the senior) resentment about some aspects of Soviet past and bitter feelings about Moscow University, but wikipedia is not a novel and to cite here obviously false statements would hardly be right...I am not very good in English language(sorry) and so I am not going to involve myself in discussions, but want to remind you some other articles from this same wikipedia about some Nobel Prize winners of Jewish origin who graduated from Moscow State University - look at this :

"Vitaly Lazarevich Ginzburg, ForMemRS[1] (Russian: Вита́лий Ла́заревич Ги́нзбург; October 4, 1916 – November 8, 2009) was a Soviet theoretical physicist, astrophysicist, Nobel laureate, a member of the Soviet and Russian Academies of Sciences and one of the fathers of Soviet hydrogen bomb.[2][3] He was the successor to Igor Tamm as head of the Department of Theoretical Physics of the Academy's physics institute (FIAN), and an outspoken atheist.[4]

Biography

He was born to a Jewish family in Moscow in 1916, the son of an engineer Lazar Efimovich Ginzburg and a doctor Augusta Felgenauer, and graduated from the Physics Faculty of Moscow State University in 1938. He defended his candidate's (Ph.D.) dissertation in 1940, and his doctor's dissertation in 1942."

There are numerous other examples of less known professors of Jewish origin in USSR....You may explore it yourself using this wikipedia. It is just to prove you that not only my own expirience contradict to this ridiculous statement that "at Moscow State University, Jews were required to take their entrance exams in different rooms than non-Jewish applicants, which were nicknamed "gas chambers", and they were marked on a harsher scale.", but also information from this same wikipedia also contradict to this statement. I think that it is your responsibility not to misinform readers - I understand that you report opinion of mr.Brin (father of Sergey Brin), but from reading the text a reader can't understand that this opinion may be not exactly true. I still recommend you to deleat this quotation - it is false and not nesessary even if you want to prove that Jews indeed had some difficulties in USSR (other facts pretty much prove that - no need to use false information to prove that) - so why to oppose obvious fact that this quotation is misleading? Please deleat it yourself - it is a matter of truth vs. false, not a matter of my attempt to prove my point no matter what.I'll come back to read your responce, but will not involve myself in further discussions, - I think that I provided enough proves. (or you may leave a quotation but to change the paragraph so that readers understand that there are alternative opinions about words of mr.Brin regarding practicies of Moscow Univeresity in Soviet times regarding Jews) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.252.74.147 (talk) 20:53, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

We cite a reliable source which makes clear that Michael Brin made the claims he did. This is all we need to do. As to whether they are true or not, we make no assertions. Our articles are based on reliable sources, not on assertions of 'truth' from contributors. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:55, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

OK, so I got the following from you :"Please read Wikipedia:No legal threats. Contributors making such threats are liable to be blocked from editing. If you chose to withdraw the threat (which will be necessary for this discussion to continue), please make any further postings at Talk:Sergey Brin as I have asked. This is not the appropriate place to discuss article content, and I will accordingly not respond to any more postings here. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:49, 16 May 2013 (UTC)"

---

so as you requested I do withdraw the legal threat (if you think it was one -I don't want to argue) - so, I understand your formal point, but there is also "impression" that the text provides and using information which is not true (and you probably have already understood that it is not true, though it is real quotation), so using such quotation may provide wrong understanding as a whole about institution? So, are there any special considerations why you think this particular quotation *which is misleading, despite it is indeed a quotaion of a person should be in the text? ...If you don'twant to discuss it with me, please consult me wether there is any other wikipedia authority (or moderators community) that can resolve this dispute among you and me? Again, I want to be as polite and friendly as possible (sorry if my English is not good enough to express it) and I am very much upset with your immidiate rely to strict measures (blocking from editing etc.), talking to me like a police to violater. Hope you will explain me your position or at least will give me appropriate consultation where to apply further. Thank you for your responce - it is very important to me 178.252.74.147 (talk) 23:18, 16 May 2013 (UTC).

I have already explained Wikipedia policy. the material in question is clearly indicated to be Michael Brin's assertion, rather than an assertion by Wikipedia. It is cited to a reliable source (The Independent). There is really nothing further to discuss, as long as your arguments amount to an assertion that 'it isn't true'. The article doesn't say that it is. I suggest that you stop wasting your time over the matter. I have no further interest in debating this further. AndyTheGrump (talk) 00:46, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

As a student or faculty member, apparently, you might want to do your own research. For example, here's an article from the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, describing the university the same year Sergey was born. --Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 00:59, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Sergey makes more than a $1 salary this can be used to support his turtle conservation company165.165.237.50 (talk) 11:22, 15 September 2015 (UTC)</ref>

that should probably be fixed 64.247.85.160 (talk) 08:34, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Why? Realize that his corporate salary may be $1.00 but the valuation of his Google stock would be much more, like $20billion+ Is this not correct?  Done: The page reads correctly to me. — Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 02:13, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Life extensionist

• (cur - prev) 18:15, 3 May 2014‎ 213.109.230.96 (talk)‎ . . (34,859 bytes) (+32)‎ . . (→‎External links: Category:Life extensionists) (undo)
• (cur - prev) 19:51, 3 May 2014‎ William Avery (talk - contribs)‎ . . (34,827 bytes) (-32)‎ . . (Reverted 1 pending edit by 213.109.230.96 to revision 606697944 by AndyTheGrump: Unexplained. Unsupported by citations or article text) (undo) [automatically accepted]

Sergey Brin's support for the life extension cause of the anti-aging movement is evidenced by the fact that he co-founded Calico "with the stated goal of focusing on the challenge of curing aging and associated diseases" and has co-funded the Breakthrough Prize in Life Sciences, awarded for "Research aimed at curing intractable diseases and extending human life".

* http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/08/20/the-immortality-financiers-the-billionaires-who-want-to-live-forever.html * https://plus.google.com/+LarryPage/posts/Lh8SKC6sED1 * http://books.google.com.ua/books?id=v9njvYtUwBEC&pg=PA40&lpg=PA40&dq=sergey+brin+%22longevity+OR+aging%22&source=bl&ots=D59KHdoSek&sig=ShZkmYGksFLhHJ0570NATHB1-6A&hl=en&sa=X&ei=_cVmU8fkKaKT4ATR6YCYDg&ved=0CHgQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=sergey%20brin&f=false * http://mariakonovalenko.wordpress.com/2013/08/13/a-letter-to-sergey-brin/ * http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-n-gray/john-gray-life-extension-_b_4732054.html

213.109.230.96 (talk) 02:32, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Sergey Brin. 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/20130613155605/http://backrub.c63.be/1997/backrub.htm to http://backrub.c63.be/1997/backrub.htm

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} 16:57, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Patronymic name

This article lists his full name as "Sergey Mikhaylovich Brin". How do we know that his patronymic is part of his legal name? As a US citizen, it is by no means necessary that Mikhaylovich is part of his legal name in any way. I think it's a lazy assumption that just because a person was born in Russia, they necessarily have a patronymic name. I was born in Russia, too, but my legal name only consists of my first name and last name. Do we have any reference/source to support it? -- Northern (talk) 18:20, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Corporate tax issues not biographical

{{BLP noticeboard}}

The text below, about Google, is being added to biography articles although it should be put in the Google article, if anywhere.

Criticism over tax avoidance

On 16 May 2013, Google was accused of being "calculated and unethical" over its use of highly contrived and artificial distinctions to avoid paying billions of pounds in Corporation tax owed by its UK operations by Margaret Hodge MP, the chair of the United Kingdom Public Accounts Committee.[28] Google was accused by the committee, which represents the interests of UK taxpayers, of being "evil" for not paying its "fair amount of tax".[29] Brin, without a formal executive role, was not required to testify, but a senior Google executive was summoned before the committee. The executive made a number of potentially false statements, was warned against lying to the committee, and was told by the chairman of the committee "I think that you do evil".[30] The scheme had begun in 2007.

In 2015, the UK Government introduced a new law intended to penalise Google and other large multinational corporations's artificial tax avoidance.[31] Google was further accused of avoiding paying tens of billions of dollars in tax since 2007 through a convoluted scheme of inter-company licensing agreements and transfers to tax havens.[32]

References to the tax issues were also then added in the lead, after the part about the unofficial motto, "Don't be evil." An editor added this OR: "This view was undermined by revelations that Google uses shell companies and tax havens ...." Note also that the user has added this tax issue to some other articles, and a similar tax news story about Facebook. --Light show (talk) 04:51, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Firstly, 'Note also that the user has added this tax issue to some other articles, and a similar tax news story about Facebook' is rather a silly thing to say - these companies both engage in these practices, have been strongly criticised for it, and thus any reasonable person would deem it suitable for inclusion in the article in question.

Such has been the scale of the issue, the OECD has published reports on it, the UK Government has passed laws restricting it, multiple countries are investigating it, and the Double Irish scheme itself has been shut down to newcomers and is being phased out. The Dutch Sandwich has also come under considerable pressure.

The reason why this is relevant to Brin and Page specifically is that their holdings are inflated by billions of dollars by this exact practice, and aggressive tax avoidnace has become a core part of Google's business, with tens of billions of dollars in profits being generated that in normal curcumstances would have been paid to governments. Brin and Page, as Google and Alphabet's controlling shareholders, personally approved these schemes. Thus, inclusion is clearly merited. This is a key part of the OECD's BEPS work, so should also probably be added to that article too.--Relyiar (talk) 12:22, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Your opinions about the "reasons" violate clear rules about OR. If you don't understand the rules, feel free to ask what they mean. --Light show (talk) 20:25, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

"A small, three-room apartment in central Moscow"

The article mentions that "The Brin family lived in a small, three-room, 30 square meter (350 square foot) apartment in central Moscow, which they also shared with Sergey's paternal grandmother." but it fails to explain that Soviet standard of living was considerably lower than US standards, and during 70's a three-room apartment - especially one located in central Moscow - was considered a luxury in Soviet Union. Netrat (talk) 15:20, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

30 square meters is actually rather 300 square feet, not 350 (324, more precisely) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.247.5.118 (talk) 18:25, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

AVL Trees

What have you got against AVL Trees Sergey? NNcNannara (talk) 14:27, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Education in India

Serious problems for employment. Akmal0191 (talk) 09:39, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Education in India

Serious problems for employment. Asraf Jahangir (talk) 09:49, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Article Needs a Section on the Video Done the Day after the 2016 Election

This video, done the day after the 2016 election, shows executives shocked and disappointed that the election didn't go their way (Hillary lost). This is vitally important because Google really is a monopoly, and such egregious political bias as shown in the 2016 video would bolster all the many complaints of search engine political bias. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.152.216.213 (talk) 16:43, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Net worth error?

Right now, his article says "As of July 2020, Brin is the 7th-richest person in the world, with an estimated net worth of US$67.6 billion" and Larry Page's article says "as of July 2020, Page was the 13th-richest person in the world, with a net worth of $69.4 billion, according to Forbes". Something's not right here, since the 7th richest person can't be worth $1.8 billion less than the 13th. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:1805:D80F:B88B:F9A0:1561:531C (talk) 06:34, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Other interests section

The “other interest” section looks more like a portrayal of a hero rather than encyclopedic information. I don’t know what to change but someone should review the statements. 185.113.97.92 (talk) 18:24, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

I trimmed the section considerably. This article is not a PR page for Brin. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ZimZalaBim (talk • contribs)

To be honest the trimming looks too drastic to me. We removed a number of independent reliable references and a few bits of interesting info (like his personal involvement in the Google Glass project) Alex Bakharev (talk) 00:14, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

Why isn't he described as Russian-American?

His Russian origin should not be sidelined. Why is it not included? See Satya Nadella, Indian-American. See also Sundar Pichai, Indian-American. NeutralityForAll (talk) 22:35, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

I mean, in the first line of his article, shouldn't he be called Russian-American? NeutralityForAll (talk) 22:45, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

If the reason he isn't described as Russian-American is that his notable activities occured in America and not in Russia, why is Satya Nadella described as Indian-American? There are no notable activities for Satya before coming to America. NeutralityForAll (talk) 22:57, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Is the fact that Russia is unpopular among Westerners a factor? Be honest. Look into your heart NeutralityForAll (talk) 22:59, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

See MOS:NATIONALITY. Brin is a US citizen. His family emigrated to the US when he was six years old - long before he became famous. We discuss his early life in the article body, where it is appropriate. As for Satya Nadella, the circumstances may be different, but in any case, that isn't an issue for this talk page. AndyTheGrump (talk) 23:02, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

"Backrub" is used introduced in a paragraph with no prior explanation

Please add some link or sentence to explain what "Backrub" is before using it as if the reader is supposed to know what it is. Bryanfw (talk) 14:46, 27 January 2023 (UTC)