Misplaced Pages

Talk:Vivek Ramaswamy

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Southasianhistorian8 (talk | contribs) at 15:28, 6 September 2023 (→FDA approved drugs: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 15:28, 6 September 2023 by Southasianhistorian8 (talk | contribs) (→FDA approved drugs: new section)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Skip to table of contents
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Vivek Ramaswamy article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4Auto-archiving period: 7 days 
Warning: active arbitration remedies

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Individuals with a conflict of interest, particularly those representing the subject of the article, are strongly advised not to directly edit the article. See Misplaced Pages:Conflict of interest. You may request corrections or suggest content here on the Talk page for independent editors to review, or contact us if the issue is urgent.
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is rated C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconBiography
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages'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
WikiProject iconUnited States: Ohio / Cincinnati Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Ohio.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Cincinnati.
The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE.
The following Misplaced Pages contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.
Media mentionThis article has been mentioned by multiple media organizations:

Semi-protected edit request on 26 August 2023

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Change "Hindu Tamil Brahmin" to "Hindu Brahmin". Ramaswamy family has never identified as Tamil as they are from Kerala and not Tamil Nadu. 2603:8080:5600:30F6:A08A:961F:D211:BC9F (talk) 15:24, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

 Done I could not verify "Tamil" in any of the five sources for the sentence (although two or three were paywalled). —C.Fred (talk) 15:31, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
Kerala and Tamilnadu are states formed in 1956. Vivek is from Iyer sub caste of Brahmin caste. They migrated 300 years due to Hindu king appointing them as priests in temple. They retained many tamil culture and still prefers to talk in Tamil. https://www.onmanorama.com/travel/kerala/2022/06/13/a-walk-through-palakkad-streets-steeped-in-history.html
His relative speak Tamil https://www.onmanorama.com/news/kerala/2023/08/30/13760-km-away-kerala-village-wakes-up-to-the-us-poll-heat-every-morning.html
The personal life section of this wiki page itself says he is fluent in Tamil.
I hope this shed some light on iyer living in palakkad, also note Vivek is added as Notable people in it https://en.wikipedia.org/Kerala_Iyers 117.213.11.67 (talk) 17:31, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
Hindustan Times uses Tamil Brahmin. TulsaPoliticsFan (talk) 16:05, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

Not a registered Republican

Wanted to seek consensus on this before editing: According to a new NBC News report, Ramaswamy is not a registered Republican in his home state of Ohio. He's listed as "unaffiliated". https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/gop-presidential-candidate-vivek-ramaswamy-unaffiliated-voter-records-rcna101827

Should the infobox be edited accordingly to reflect that? Midwood123 (talk) 03:21, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

IMHO running for the republican party nomination and taking part in the GOP debates constitutes reason enough to list him as a republican, even if he technically isnt a party member. Googleguy007 (talk) 15:12, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

Request edit on 27 August 2023

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered.
  • What I think should be changed: American businessman and a political candidate. He founded Roivant Sciences, a pharmaceutical company, in 2014
  • Why it should be changed: Sentence fails to mention that Vivek Ramaswamy is an author as well. It should say, "American businessman, author and a political candidate. He founded Roivant Sciences, a pharmaceutical company, in 2014 and is the author of Woke Inc, Nation of Victims, and Capital Punishment."
  • References supporting the possible change (format using the "cite" button): https://www.amazon.com/Books-Vivek-Ramaswamy/s?rh=n%3A283155%2Cp_27%3AVivek+Ramaswamy


Notmyusernamelol (talk) 05:46, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Most of his publications (according to WorldCat) were released within the last 3 years (except for a dissertation published in 2000 and 2007 ). So calling him an author is up for debate. Regards,  Spintendo  23:36, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

Request edit on 27 August 2023

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered.
  • What I think should be changed: "In his book Woke, Inc.: Inside Corporate America's Social Justice Scam and elsewhere, he has depicted private corporations' socially conscious investing as simultaneously ineffective and the greatest threat to American society. He published a second book, Nation of Victims: Identity Politics, the Death of Merit, and the Path Back to Excellence"
  • Why it should be changed: Sentence fails to mention Vivek Ramaswamys third book, 'Capitalist Punishment: How Wall Street Is Using Your Money to Create a Country You Didn't Vote For"
  • References supporting the possible change (format using the "cite" button):


Notmyusernamelol (talk) 05:53, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

It's not clear what is asking to be added here, besides summary-type information from the subject's publication. Regards,  Spintendo  23:36, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
Also, they seem to have made an identical request above, which I also replied to. 〜 Askarion ✉ 10:53, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

References

Neutrality: "scientist", Roivant profitability, religion, Misplaced Pages, conspiracy theories, climate

Original heading: "User:HiResolutionEdits' content removal" ~ ToBeFree (talk) 13:00, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
The following discussion is about the content removed in Special:Diff/1172460010/1172463325. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 13:03, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

@User:HiResolutionEdits You keep edit warring, dont do that please. Discuss the changes you want to make here. A Socialist Trans Girl 11:17, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

In tomorrow's discussion I will mention these points:
1. Vivek never called himself a "scientist"
2. You can not make a truth claim asserting Vivek is purposefully pandering to Evangelical Christians: the evidence to substantiate this claim is unfounded through the sources given.
There are a slew of other problems as well, but we can start here. Please look to be proactive about these issues; you can refer to my prior revisions to see where I removed information regarding point 1 and 2 to start. I am in contact with a moderator who will provide oversight through this issue; my goal is to resolve these issues (if you do not do so) tomorrow evening or by next week.
Thank you. HiResolutionEdits (talk) 12:34, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
There are no deadlines here. The discussion to reach a consensus will take as long as it will take(though it isn't open ended). You are welcome to begin now(unless you are unavailable, of course) 331dot (talk) 12:59, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
@User:HiResolutionEdits Keep in mind you can still participate in discussions, the not being allowed to edit only applies to the article itself. So, I'll address your points.
  • Vivek calling himself a scientist is stated by the source 1
  • It is in the sources given.
Thanks! (◠‿◠✿) A Socialist Trans Girl 13:04, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
When there is a dispute that can be reduced to "the source says so" vs. "the source doesn't say so", I'd like to see a quote from the source directly supporting the statement, and a link to the source if possible for easy verification. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 13:07, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Sure, here's the quote: "On the campaign trail, as he lays out why he is a different kind of presidential candidate, Vivek Ramaswamy calls himself a Harvard-trained “scientist” from the lifesaving world of biotechnology." and He is the child of Indian immigrants, and “privilege,” he said recently in Iowa, “was two parents in the house with a focus on education, achievement and actual values. That gave me the foundation to then go on to places like Harvard and Yale and become a scientist.” from this source cited in the article. A Socialist Trans Girl 13:13, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Ah, I was wondering about a different part of the article, "Ramaswamy has sought to appeal to". ~ ToBeFree (talk) 13:17, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
A Socialist Trans Girl, would you agree that in Special:Diff/1172460010/1172463325, the removal of the statement containing "Ramaswamy has sought to appeal to" was fine as the content lacks a reliable source? ~ ToBeFree (talk) 13:29, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Nope, NY times is pretty reliable. A Socialist Trans Girl 13:39, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
The source provided for that statement is the Rolling Stones magazine, and the New York Times article doesn't mention the word "evangelical". ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:19, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
@ToBeFree the source here is the New York Times, and it has the word 'evangelical' nine times, so that's not correct. And I don't see rolling stones mentioned at all anywhere in the article, so I'm not sure what you mean. A Socialist Trans Girl 03:10, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
I was looking at the source you cited above (). I was confused multiple times because of the initial multiple-bullet-point response and because both different sources are NY Times articles. I have now removed the Rolling Stone citation from the article per WP:ROLLINGSTONEPOLITICS; I had overlooked the second citation at the same place. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 04:40, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
Oki, so is it fine now? A Socialist Trans Girl 04:45, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
I haven't checked thoroughly and if it's disputed again, we may need another quote+link such as you had provided for a different disputed statement above. It's probably all already fine though. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 04:58, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
Oki, nice. A Socialist Trans Girl 05:36, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
It is not stated: that is a secondary source, which has also not referenced the source where that quote is found. This is problematic. HiResolutionEdits (talk) 13:08, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Secondary sources are preferred. If we're talking about the Rolling Stones magazine, WP:ROLLINGSTONEPOLITICS applies though. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 13:12, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
No where has Vivek said he was a "scientist" and the source in question does not reference where Vivek did say that. There is not a direct source whatsoever of Vivek making that claim. HiResolutionEdits (talk) 13:15, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
The sources does say where he said it, it says that he said it in Iowa. A Socialist Trans Girl 13:17, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
It says that in Iowa he "developed a number of medicines" NOT that he was a scientist. I would really appreciate if any moderator can verify user's source. HiResolutionEdits (talk) 13:21, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
It does say that but I wasn't talking about that one, I was talking about He is the child of Indian immigrants, and “privilege,” he said recently in Iowa, “was two parents in the house with a focus on education, achievement and actual values. That gave me the foundation to then go on to places like Harvard and Yale and become a scientist.” A Socialist Trans Girl 13:23, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
I will have to investigate further: I do not see even one cross reference to that quote from Vivek. I will post any updates here. HiResolutionEdits (talk) 13:28, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
We don't need original research based on primary sources though, just saying. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 13:29, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
I will simply have to look at what he said in Iowa and see if he has been quoted correctly; at this point, I suspect he has, but since there are no cross references I am inclined to investigate. HiResolutionEdits (talk) 13:33, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
@HiResolutionEdits what do you mean by cross reference? Doug Weller talk 06:11, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
Second point: "Vivek Ramaswamy Leans Into His Hindu Faith to Court Christian Voters". This was an article cited to substantiate claims that Vivek is pandering to a Christian base solely for his campaign progression. This is an assumption not based on a quote or empirical evidence. The source cited is an internal critique and is completely subjective, so I do not understand how truth claims can be derived from it. HiResolutionEdits (talk) 13:40, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
What from the source makes you think that? A Socialist Trans Girl 13:43, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
@HiResolutionEdits We don’t have moderator’s, no one who can “officially” do that. Doug Weller talk 06:10, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages is built on secondary sources, not primary. A Socialist Trans Girl 13:13, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
  • Reviewing the NYT article, this entire article is built around the following quote. He is the child of Indian immigrants, and “privilege,” he said recently in Iowa, “was two parents in the house with a focus on education, achievement and actual values. That gave me the foundation to then go on to places like Harvard and Yale and become a scientist.” The NYT pairs this quote with a sub headline that reads Mr. Ramaswamy calls himself a scientist from the biotech industry. The subheadline is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. Politicians say a lot of silly things and this is silly, but unless Ramaswamy is repeating this over and over and it's being reported by multiple sources (other than "the NYT reported") I'm not sure it should be included in a WP:BLP. Nemov (talk) 12:55, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
    Scientist is a very broad term, as noted on Misplaced Pages, anyone who advances knowledge in a scientific field can be termed a scientist. In case of Vivek, he did research in biology field at Harvard, and summary his senior research thesis was even published in Boston Globe, which shows that he advanced knowledge in this field

    1. he (Vivek) wrote a senior thesis on the bioethical issues associated with the creation of human-animal chimeras: living organisms currently being created from the cells of humans and animals.
      — "Rising alumni talk about their lives at Harvard—and beyond.", Harvard Magazine

    RogerYg (talk) 04:05, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
    No, that’s an undergraduate paper and certainly doesn’t make him a scientist. Just as majoring in history doesn’t make one a historian. Doug Weller talk 06:17, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
    While I agree with you that as of current facts, Vivek may not be considered a "Scientist". But, I was just pointing that according to Misplaced Pages, definition of Scientist is very broad: "A scientist is a person who researches to advance knowledge in an area of the natural sciences. https://en.wikipedia.org/Scientist
    Therefore, if someone claims to be a Scientist, based on their work with pharmaceutical drugs in whatever capacity, it may not so easy or certain to disapprove their claim, as by a non-scientific reporter from a news agency. Anyway, I guess this issue is closed for now RogerYg (talk) 04:11, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
    @RogerYg But we don't use our own articles as sources so that's irrelevant. Doug Weller talk 06:52, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
    Agree case closed, not a scientist. SPECIFICO talk 07:09, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
It is requested that the semi-protected page at Add that if he were to win the election, he would be the second person of color to become president, the first person of color from the Republican Party, and the first Asian-American president. be created. (edit · history · last · links · protection log)

This template must be followed by a complete and specific description of the request, that is, specify what text should be removed and a verbatim copy of the text that should replace it. "Please change X" is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form "please change X to Y".

The edit may be made by any autoconfirmed user. Remember to change the |answered=no parameter to "yes" when the request has been accepted, rejected or on hold awaiting user input. This is so that inactive or completed requests don't needlessly fill up the edit requests category. You may also wish to use the {{ESp}} template in the response. To request that a page be protected or unprotected, make a protection request.

178.164.179.36 (talk) 17:42, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

Request edit on 29 August 2023

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered.
  • What I think should be changed:

The line in the penultimate paragraph of "Political Positions," which reads "... but said the U.S. should not militarily defend Taiwan from Chinese attack after the U.S. has achieved "semiconductor independence," should be "... until after the U.S. has achieved semiconductor independence,"

  • Why it should be changed:

because currently as written it describes an unlikely political position opposite to that held by Ramaswamy in the linked sources.

  • References supporting the possible change (format using the "cite" button):

Source 107 immediately following uses the word "until".

 Not done The article has the polarity correct. Rewriting it as "until after" would be incorrect, and is not congruent with either the current source in the text or the multiple other sources I've checked. -- M.boli (talk) 14:49, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

MGray0 (talk) 18:52, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

References

Paid editing of Misplaced Pages mention in the BLP

I have a hard time justifying a whole section on paid editing of Misplaced Pages as part of this biography. It seems to be in the WP:UNDUE category. More importantly, there is a lack of reliable sources here. I removed one Forbes contributor source but the rest of the sources rely on HuffPost.

WP:HUFFPOST talks about this being a fairly reliable source for non political topics. This issue, while important or us Wikipedians, should not belong in a biography of a person if only supported by weak sources like HuffPost. This can (and is) mentioned in the more detailed article on the subject's presidential run.

I therefore suggest removing this entire section.

--Molochmeditates (talk) 19:07, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

Not to go too much into WP:OTHERSTUFF, but since there was no discussion here, I saw a similar situation in another biography of Hunter Biden and a discussion around paid Misplaced Pages editing: https://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Hunter_Biden#Apparently_Hunter_Biden_paid_a_firm_to_edit_his_Wikipedia_page...
The consensus there seems to be that this should not be part of the biography. --Molochmeditates (talk) 14:08, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
This is just a WP:OTHERCONTENT; Article y doesn't mention this, so article x shouldn't either. Googleguy007 (talk) 17:17, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
I've literally mentioned this in the comment you're replying to and the reason for doing so. Do you have anything substantial to add to the topic at hand, for example whether this should belong in the biography perhaps? --Molochmeditates (talk) 01:43, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
Acknowledging that you are making a baseless argument before doing it doesnt make the argument any less baseless. WP:HUFFPOST doesnt show the huffpo as unreliable, just no consensus, I have also found (with a very simple google search) articles covering the situation by Newsweek, National Review, and The New Republic. Googleguy007 (talk) 12:56, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
There are also the five other articles on the talk page about it that aren't currently cited in the article. TulsaPoliticsFan (talk) 18:25, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
I don't see any WP:RS links for this on the talk page. Mind posting the links you have in mind here? They might be better suited than what we currently have. --Molochmeditates (talk) 01:46, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Forbes contributor posts as reliable sources for a biography

I have removed a couple of Forbes contributor blogs from this article. These are not reliable sources (WP:RS). We have had several discussions about Forbes contributor blogs in the past, and the consensus is not to use them - see WP:FORBESCON. This is especially important for biographies that have a higher threshold of quality sources to include material here. We should be removing future addition of Forbes contributor blogs as well.

@Callanecc - do you disagree with this, or have anything else to add?

--Molochmeditates (talk) 13:58, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

Lies and equivocations

There have been numerous comments by his opponents, by news media and by analysts concerning false statements, false denials, and other tactics they have identified in his public speech. For example as given in this analysis. How should the article reflect this feature of Vivek's public persona? SPECIFICO talk 22:31, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

Not to wade too far into WP:OTHERSTUFF one of the distinctive factors of Joe Biden's political career was the numerous false statements or exaggerations he made pretty consistently for decades. I don't think it deserves a section, but specific examples could be included in the campaign section if it received a lot of coverage. Nemov (talk) 23:03, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
I personally do not think that should be part of a biography but if this receives significant coverage from reliable sources, we could include it in the main campaign article for the candidate. --Molochmeditates (talk) 23:16, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
A "pattern of falsehoods" is pretty central to who the man is. Not sure it is out of place for the bio. Especially in light of some of the content concerning his business activities. SPECIFICO talk 02:06, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
NYT article is mostly campaign/political matters. VR misrepresents a campaign event. VR this week's political interview denies that last week he said something different Stuff like that. If he weren't campaigning nobody would care. If it belongs anywhere, it should go in the campaign article. -- M.boli (talk) 03:44, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
Echoing everything @M.boli said. I'd also add that in my admittedly cynical take, this seems par for the course for political campaigns albeit with different levels of media scrutiny. I don't think we should go and add a "lies and equivocation" section for every politician because that might 10x the length of each biography. --Molochmeditates (talk) 14:06, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
As his campaign proceeds, it is dwarfing any prior notability of this individual. There are more and more sources that describe him as being a Trump impersonator without the charm. His statements about foreign policy, constitutional process, etc. are being described as risible and ignorant demagoguery. This is core to his bio. Whatever financial deals he did are mundane stuff unrelated to his enduring notability. SPECIFICO talk 13:34, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
I would caution anyone writing or editing a WP:BLP on a current high profile presidential candidate to use caution not to turn the article into a news article that covers every story of the week. That's not the role of Misplaced Pages. When in doubt, wait a few weeks. Which will happen anyway if someone throws up a RfC. If we had to include every controversial statement that a politician made those articles would go on forever. If there's a ton of coverage about something it can be included in the campaign section or spin it off into another article if you want to document every single thing. Nemov (talk) 13:42, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
There's no suggestion we list his statements. We are seeing many articles that characterize and find patterns and make comparisons and provide criticisms of the statements. Such summary representations in RS are not NOTNEWS in the context of the current focus of this page. SPECIFICO talk 13:48, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
Respectfully no Disagree with SPECIFICO talk and Fully Agree with Nemov on this point that WP:BLP is quite strict policy that gives benefit of doubt to the Living person, and Misplaced Pages editors are bound by WP:BLP. Also agree with Nemov on WP:NOTTHENEWS. We need to be cautious in adding any defamatory material on Vivek based on WP:OTHERSTUFF that News media often does, but that is a violation of WP:BLP for a Misplaced Pages article RogerYg (talk) 03:21, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
It is important that all Wiki editors note the importance of WP:BLP (before putting negative News material on Wiki pages) as quoted below

  1. WP:BLP:Such material requires a high degree of sensitivity, and must adhere strictly to all applicable laws in the United States, to this policy, and to Misplaced Pages's three core content policies: Neutral point of view (NPOV), Verifiability (V), & No original research (NOR). Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—must be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion
    — "Misplaced Pages:Biographies of living persons",     Misplaced Pages

    RogerYg (talk) 03:35, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
What do you find defamatory? SPECIFICO talk 03:39, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
I was replying to the broad discussion on WP:BLP issues above, not to any specific statement yet. Basically, noting that Misplaced Pages standards are higher than News media for reporting claimed lies or anything defamatory. RogerYg (talk) 04:42, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
Oh. Well, he is widely criticized and ridiculed, but there are many solid RS for such reactions. SPECIFICO talk 06:22, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Vivek nepotism

Does the article mention that vivek practiced nepotism at axovant? Maybe not worded as nepotism but that he had family members. Unless axovant was a family business. https://www.biospace.com/article/why-former-medivation-ceo-and-a-once-failed-alzheimer-s-drug-could-be-a-recipe-for-disaster-for-axovant-/ 207.96.32.81 (talk) 13:48, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

In fact it does. In the 'Roivant Sciences and Subsidiaries' section: The company's market value initially soared to almost $3 billion, although at the time it only had eight employees, including Ramaswamy's brother and mother. PhotogenicScientist (talk) 13:58, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
That is not the most significant content of the cited biospace piece. The more significant narrative is about VR's expertise, management, and success or lack thereof in the business of that company. We can't extract something that is not considered remarkable by mainstream sources covering him. SPECIFICO talk 15:34, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
Agree with SPECIFICO talk. Nepotism has not been highlighted in the source, and Misplaced Pages pages are not opinion columns to extract such controversial claims from news, especially for Living persons.RogerYg (talk)

Climate change denial

I removed a phrase that claims Ramaswamy is a "climate change denier." The current sourcing is coming from a NYT article from a recent debate. The quote they used doesn't support the NYT claim since he clearly is talking about the agenda. It's possible he's made this claim elsewhere so if someone wants to add it back please find a source. Thanks! Nemov (talk) 21:03, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

This Time article There's More Than Meets the Eye to Ramaswamy's Climate Comment seems to support what you're saying. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 21:55, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
Worland in Time writes that "leading Republicans can no longer feasibly deny that climate change is happening." Using "agenda" and similar locutions allows Republican politicians (he names several, starting with V.R.) to appear that they are not denying climate change while at the same time stake out opposition to addressing climate change. So V.R. is very much at odds with the scientific consensus on climate change, which is that it needs to be addressed. His company's flagship product is an energy-sector mutual fund predicated on pushing energy companies to mine more hydrocarbons, remove carbon accounting, and ignore considerations of climate change if it gets in the way of profits. V.R.'s most recent book contains a chapter advocating using financial investment to work against the climate science consensus, with reference to the climate-denying literature to back it up. His oft-repeated campaign chant drill, frack, burn coal may lack the crowd-rowsing psychosexual pizazz of last decade's drill, baby, drill, but the rhetorical point is the same.
It could be ok write that his positions are at odds with the scientific consensus. -- M.boli (talk) 13:23, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
There is a consensus about climate change. It's a bit of a stretch to suggest there's a "scientific consensus" around political policies to deal with it. That's entering opinion territory, which is what political article like to dabble in, but we should avoid. This section should just stick to his political positions. Nemov (talk) 15:22, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
Yes, as the Time author said, But Ramaswamy did have a lot to say about the validity of the “agenda,” presumably referring to policies being implemented by the Biden Administration to slow emissions. One can presume otherwise, e.g. that the New York Times posting (which left out the word "agenda" in the version I've seen) is reliable or that agenda refers to a scientific consensus, but I disagree with putting a Misplaced Pages editor's presumption in the article, and disaagree with M.boli's re-insertion (which Nemov reverted), since I believe WP:BLPREQUESTRESTORE applies. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 15:35, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
Agree with Peter Gulutzan that WP:BLPREQUESTRESTORE may apply. And, Agree with Nemov's removal of the poorly sourced broad claim on climate change denial. A specific claim giving the context may be added with consensus. RogerYg (talk) 06:36, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
What are his specific climate oolicies? SPECIFICO talk 06:44, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
This article should simply state that he claimed that more people died from the climate change response than from climate change rather than also say it was a false claim. It has not been proven false just because the NYT and Politifact says so.
Vivek is correct, statistically. Anything that makes you poorer will kill you. Being rich is more important to longevity than having access to medicine. Expensive energy, therefore, kills people. "Research shows that the social determinants can be more important than health care or lifestyle choices in influencing health."
https://www.who.int/health-topics/social-determinants-of-health#tab=tab_1
People are in fact dying from lack of AC and heat, and lack of AC and heat is mostly due to energy being expensive. Energy is expensive due to restrictions on drilling. His statement has not been proven false. At best his claims were contested by political opposition. Silencertalk (talk) 14:43, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
He made a claim without providing any evidence, two separate organisations fact-checked it and found it to be false, ergo it's false. It's as simple as that. Anything beyond that is WP:Original research. ser! 14:53, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
We could reword this around the Wiki voice to say something like in a Republican primary debate, he said that "the climate change agenda is a hoax" and asserted without evidence that "more people are dying from climate policies than actual climate change." I can't read the NYT source, but the FOX source doesn't flat out say it's false. Either way, just attribute it after the claim instead of the Wiki voice calling it false. Nemov (talk) 15:05, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
By the FOX one I assume you mean the Politifact/Poynter one? I can't find any other Fox ones, bar that one which mentions the "Fox News" debates in the article, though I acknowledge your point that it doesn't directly call his claim false - it does call his "climate change agenda is a hoax" one false verbatim though. I have a NYT subscription so I'll post an excerpt here collapsed for your perusal.
Content of NYT article
“The reality is more people are dying of bad climate change policies than they are of actual climate change.”

— in the first Republican debate on Wednesday

False. There is no evidence to support this assertion. A spokeswoman for Mr. Ramaswamy cited a 2022 column in the libertarian publication “Reason” that argued that limiting the use of fossil fuels would hamper the ability to deliver power, heat homes and pump water during extreme weather events. But the campaign did not provide examples of climate change policies actually causing deaths.
If we need to attribute, we have two different sources calling two different claims of his false in that exact wording, so we do have something to work with there. ser! 15:12, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
Thanks so much! Sorry, you're right, I meant "Politifact." This might be too wordy but attribute it something like this? in a Republican primary debate, he said that "the climate change agenda is a hoax." His also asserted without evidence, that "more people are dying from climate policies than actual climate change." Fact checkers rated the claim false since the campaign provided no evidence to support it. Nemov (talk) 15:26, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
Re the New York Times post: you can find on wayback an early version quoting Mr Ramaswamy as saying "that climate change is a hoax", and a later version where the wording has been changed to "the climate change agenda is a hoax". WP:RS says "Signals that a news organization engages in fact-checking and has a reputation for accuracy are the publication of corrections ..." and New York Times didn't. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 19:55, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
That is a little weird. The publish correction notices regularly, they published corrections notices to other articles mentioning Ramaswamy at about the same day. But this correction was not noted.
I don't think this lapse would cause a problem, an archive.org capture two hours later shows that the quote was corrected. Searching for the article or following the link will find the corrected version. But it is indeed odd that they corrected it without note. -- M.boli (talk) 23:09, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

I'm not understanding the argument here. "Agenda" is often used as a right-wing culture war signifier. A politician who rails against "the gay agenda" is properly understood as opposing some rights for gay people. A politician who rails against "the climate change agenda" and "climate change religion" and "supposed global warming" etc. disagrees, perforce, with the scientific consensus on climate change. -- M.boli (talk) 23:34, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Sounds like an excellent idea for an essay, but I fail to see a compelling Misplaced Pages policy argument in your comment. Nemov (talk) 23:41, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
In much the same way that somebody who advocates in favor of flat-Earth theories and rails against the "round-Earth agenda" would be described in Misplaced Pages. We wouldn't need to find a reliable source specifically labeling the person "flat-Earther" or "round-Earth denier." We could write that the subject disagreed that the Earth is round. Trying to parse which particular aspects of the so-called round-Earth agenda was being objected to wouldn't be needed.
Ramaswamy rails against policies to address climate change, he rails against the "climate change agenda" and "climate religion" and "supposed global warming" and so forth. I fail to see how we aren't licensed to write that he disagrees with the scientific consensus on climate change, which is what I proposed above. I can see how applying the denier label could be troublesome, and require more sourcing. But I don't think my suggestion is synthesis or OR. -- M.boli (talk) 01:34, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
Actually, that's not really how we treat such views. Please see WP:FRINGE. We don't treat those statements as just another opinion. SPECIFICO talk 02:01, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
Damn straight it is FRINGE. That's why we are here discussing the matter. It is malpractice to repeat Ramaswamy's positions on climate change without noting that he is in error, which is what the current text does (except for one small point).
What I suggested in my comment on the 4th is to write in the first sentence that Ramaswamy's positions are "at odds with the scientific consensus." Later proposing "disagrees with the scientific consensus" was a mistake on my part. I suggest "at odds with the scientific consensus" could cover the problem of pretending that Ramaswamy's views are potentially valid, without getting into the thicket of emotions surrounding the word denier. M.boli (talk) 03:02, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Birthright citizenship

V.R. proposes abandoning birthright citizenship. Birthright citizenship is a constitutional right. He isn't the only politician to do so, articles often mention that the proposals are in the realm of constitutional rights. I agree that the reverted language about repealing the 14th amendment is synthesis and weird. It may also be that Ramaswamy has also stated that he'd like to end birthright citizenship, a right codified in 14th Amendment to the Constitution is unnecessarily wordy and specific. Also unnecessarily sea-of-blue. I propose paring it down to: Ramaswamy has also stated that he'd like to end birthright citizenship, a constitutional right. For the curious, birthright citizenship describes where in the constitution it resides. But not noticing that the discusion is about a right written into the constitution strikes me as exceedingly odd. -- M.boli (talk) 13:23, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

That version is better than the original, but I'm still not sure it's necessary since it's a section about his political positions and not the source of the law. Maybe it would be clearer if he said he supported an amendment to the constitution changing birthright citizenship? Nemov (talk) 15:17, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
Not everything under political positions focuses directly on the Constitution. The environment is an example of a political position which the Constitution gives no clear guidance on. However, V.R.'s stance going against something that has been guaranteed by the Constitution is what makes it notable. I agree with @M.boli, I think "Ramaswamy has also stated that he'd like to end birthright citizenship, a constitutional right. gets to the jist of why this stance is important in the most concise way possible, would adhere to the text most closely with what the article says about the 14th amendment, while allowing the reader to understand why this issue is being brought up in the first place. Not mentioning the fact that it is within the constitution would be censoring this topic way too much. Wozal (talk) 16:02, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
Please provide some well sourced specific claims instead of very broad unsourced claims. Also, taking things out of context and cherry picking a view may not be helpful, so we need to have sources that provide the context of the claim RogerYg (talk) 04:29, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Suggestion to include Ramaswamy's harsh criticism of Trump from his book "Nation of Victims"

Could somebody please add this? It seems like a pretty relevant political position. Chris Christie referenced his book's attacks on Trump at the recent GOP debate, so this is no obscure topic. Ramaswamy compared Trump to Stacey Abrams, called him a "sore loser" and called his actions on January 6th "downright abhorrent" and a "dark day for democracy." This stands in stark contract to Ramaswamy's current statements about January 6th.

Ramaswamy also advocated mask wearing as "personal responsibility" and criticized conservatives opposed to masks. So this article is properly balanced and objective, I think it's important to include these contradictory past positions. 70.121.162.56 (talk) 21:10, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Please provide Reliable sources for your claims, and they can be considered for addition if appropriate. What Chris Christie says on stage is not a sufficient reliable source for Misplaced Pages RogerYg (talk) 04:23, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 5 September 2023

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Under the Axovant section (which at least is already more detailed) it needs to be said that it's been accused of being a pump-and-dump - see https://fortune.com/2023/08/31/smoke-mirrors-debate-vivek-ramaswamy-2-year-diversionary-tactics-business-commentary-sonnenfeld etc. 92.21.80.37 (talk) 19:54, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. The provided source is an opinion piece. – Recoil16 (talk) 23:01, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 6 September 2023

It is requested that an edit be made to the extended-confirmed-protected article at Vivek Ramaswamy. (edit · history · last · links · protection log)

This template must be followed by a complete and specific description of the request, that is, specify what text should be removed and a verbatim copy of the text that should replace it. "Please change X" is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form "please change X to Y".

The edit may be made by any extended confirmed user. Remember to change the |answered=no parameter to "yes" when the request has been accepted, rejected or on hold awaiting user input. This is so that inactive or completed requests don't needlessly fill up the edit requests category. You may also wish to use the {{EEp}} template in the response. To request that a page be protected or unprotected, make a protection request.

1)Change "He founded Roivant Sciences, a pharmaceutical company, in 2014" to "He founded Roivant Sciences, a pharmaceutical company, in 2014. Also authored Woke Inc, Nation of Victims, and Capitalist Punishment between the years 2021-2023. Notmyusernamelol (talk) 05:26, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

FDA approved drugs

According to this New York Times Article, The core company Mr. Ramaswamy built has since had a hand in bringing five drugs to market, including treatments for uterine fibroids, prostate cancer and the rare genetic condition he mentioned on the stump in Iowa. The company says the last 10 late-stage clinical trials of its drugs have all succeeded, an impressive streak in a business where drugs commonly fail.- the rare genetic condition being a therapy for kids, 40 of them a year, born with a genetic condition who, without treatment, die by the age of 3.”

It seems the current article is omitting these details. I was wondering if the above paragraph could be included into the article, preferably by someone who has experience in these areas. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 15:28, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Categories: