Contents

Talk:Bill Gates: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 23:43, 20 April 2008

	Bill Gates has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassessit.
Article milestones Date Process Result March 19, 2006 Peer review Reviewed April 1, 2006 Good article nominee Listed September 2, 2006 Articles for deletion Speedily kept April 6, 2008 Featured article candidate Not promoted This article was on the Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive for the week of November 27, 2005. Current status: Good article

This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

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. Biography: Science and Academia GA‑class This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles GA This article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. This article is supported by the science and academia work group (assessed as Top-importance).

This article has been mentioned by a media organization: Rob Enderle (April 25, 2005). "IPod's Dirty Little Secret and the Power of the Internet". TechNewsWorld.

I must say something i noticed.The stock prices that were used for the list are from 11th of february.OK.Arcelormittal close price for 11th of febr is 67.82 you can see that on the site.Also,another thing you can see is mittal family stake which is 43.04%=623620000 million shares.If you make a multiplication 623620000 x 67.82 thats equal to 42293908400 billion dollars...why Forbes says its 45? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.72.69.137 (talk) 19:27, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another bit of movie trivia: Shot through the head by the general in charge of the war against Canada after a computer crash in South Park: Bigger, Longer and Uncut (1999) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0158983/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.27.4.146 (talk) 22:58, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

this lists bill gates as the third richest man in the world however every other article on him including Forbes still lists him as number one. this entire article is very inaccurate and completely fails to list all his troubles with the law or how he got his first interactive software from tanking apples design. i think watching pirates or silicon valley is a much better reference and everyone should ignore this entire article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.48.178.147 (talk) 21:10, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That documentary is unofficial, it is full of lies, and barely cites sources. Zachary8222 (talk) 14:17, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

With the exception of one subhead (on Management style), this biography reads like a resume written by the Microsoft public relations department or Gates himself, rather than a balanced, encyclopedic entry on a well known historical figure.

In particular, the Windows text does not mention agreements and business dealings with Apple Computer to create word processing and spreadsheet software for the world's first commercially successful computer with a graphic user interface — the Macintosh. In fact, this Wikipedia entry glosses over the creation of Microsoft's most successful product, the Windows operating system. It does not delve into the controversy that eventually erupted after Gates was shown the Macintosh operating system by Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak and convinced to create business software for the new computer.

It is common knowledge that Gates also decided to copy the idea and create Windows. Microsoft has been copying key Apple products ever since.

The competition between these two Information Age titans and their enigmatic leaders is legendary and riveting. Their story harkens back to the struggles between Industrial Age steel, railroad and automotive barons of the 19th century who helped America become an economic powerhouse. The omission of this part of the Bill Gates story from this Wikipedia entry is troubling, and it reinforces criticism that Wikipedia has difficulty achieving accuracy and balance in its presentations.

Geopix (talk) 10:16, 7 April 2008 (UTC) George Wedding[reply]

That's exactly it—we don't want to make this a huge soap opera. I'll continue to add information to the article, but keep in mind that a lot of the information you mentioned belongs in Microsoft and not here. Information here primarily concerns Gates himself, so information should be included if we are certain that he has had a direct impact on something, otherwise we'll be going down a slippery slope towards a Microsoft v. Apple rivalry. Gary King (talk) 19:29, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Where is the controversial section? The article gravitates around his good side, but makes no mention of his wrongdoings. As a matter of fact, he has a police record (for a reason) and has been involved in a number of escandals. I believe the article does not show a clear and objetive picture of him. Wikipedia is not known to be very "forgiving" with celebrities and personalities, but somehow this article makes him look like some sort of modern business saint. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.97.111.217 (talk) 13:47, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think some of his famous quote (or misquotes should be mentioned in this article)

the 640k is a misquote but it is a famous misquote

he claimed there would be no spam by 2006, this was a fairly notable claim in tech circles

his letter to hackers is also fairly famous

this article has very little on his tech career despite him being head of Microsoft, i agree it should be about him, but he has said a lot of famous tech stuff himself.