Jump to content
 







Main menu
   


Navigation  



Main page
Contents
Current events
Random article
About Wikipedia
Contact us
Donate
 




Contribute  



Help
Learn to edit
Community portal
Recent changes
Upload file
 








Search  

































Create account

Log in
 









Create account
 Log in
 




Pages for logged out editors learn more  



Contributions
Talk
 



















Contents

   



(Top)
 


1 Original police report was claimed to be 30 people, not 5, not 34, not 36  





2 Request to split scandal section  
4 comments  




3 May 2024  
14 comments  













Talk:Jeffrey Epstein




Page contents not supported in other languages.  









Article
Talk
 

















Read
Edit
Add topic
View history
 








Tools
   


Actions  



Read
Edit
Add topic
View history
 




General  



What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Get shortened URL
Download QR code
 




Print/export  



Download as PDF
Printable version
 
















Appearance
   

 






From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 


Original police report was claimed to be 30 people, not 5, not 34, not 36[edit]

The record is online but is mentioned several times here along with one person who broke down and told interrogator what they wanted.

https://www.insider.com/ghislaine-maxwell-testimony-jeffrey-epstein-released-2020-10?back=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2Fsearch%3Fclient%3Dsafari%26as_qdr%3Dall%26as_occt%3Dany%26safe%3Dactive%26as_q%3DEpstein+trial+testimony%26channel%3Daplab%26source%3Da-app1%26hl%3Den

Request to split scandal section[edit]

I had already split the R. Kelly section into the separate court case part. Now I request to split the Jeffrey Epstein scandal section the same. Darrion "Beans" Brown 🙂 (my talk page / my sandbox) 02:41, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, I was referring to split this section to "Jeffrey Epstein sex trafficking scandal". Darrion "Beans" Brown 🙂 (my talk page / my sandbox) 02:46, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it should be split as that is his main source of notoriety. R. Kelly is more notable for his music than for his long series of crimes, while Epstein's notability as a financier is there it is inextricably tied up in it. The scandal is him and he is the scandal, etc. PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:06, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
agreeee 2001:8A0:7E0C:A400:D4D0:975E:E205:42DF (talk) 05:28, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

May 2024[edit]

Ratmanny: This edit was automatically tagged because it used the WP:NYPOST and WP:THESUN. This should have been fixed before putting the edit straight back again with these sources. ♦IanMacM (talk to me) 07:55, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But I don't see the NYPOST on the list of the currently deprecated sources. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deprecated_sources Ratmanny (talk) 08:16, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Both of these are listed at WP:RSP, which is why they get tagged automatically as "use of deprecated (unreliable) source" in the edit history.--♦IanMacM (talk to me) 08:28, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, now I fix it. Ratmanny (talk) 08:34, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The problem with this edit is that is has simply removed the two cites that were tagged as unreliable, while keeping the text the same. The statement "Epstein was known for preferring prepubescents and barely pubescents girls or looking as such at the very most, to the point of putting girls on extreme particular diets and conditions to keep them mantaining a prepuberal look and body" appears to be backed by this story in the New York Post which says『Jeffrey Epstein and his accused madam Ghislaine Maxwell put his young victims on “ridiculous,” extreme diets to maintain their “prepubescent” look, accuser Virginia Roberts Giuffre claimed.』The other cites are not specifically backing this claim. Apart from being in the New York Post, the cite provides more context by saying that this is a claim made by Virginia Giuffre and does not state it as a fact. The source in The Sun also makes clear that this is a claim made by Virginia Giuffre.[1]. Despite the large number of sources added here, the specific claim about the diet comes from the New York Post and The Sun, and does not state it as a fact, only a claim by Virginia Giuffre.--♦IanMacM (talk to me) 10:09, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I still don't get what's your point to justify the revert of all that content. Your point is just because two sources not considered valid on this Wikipedia says the same thing that others considered reliable and valid do, this is enough to invalidate all the rest? And the undebunked testimony of one of the victims is not reliable?
https://sputnikglobe.com/20200922/epstein-maxwell-kept-sex-girls-on-special-diet-to-make-them-prepubescently-thin-accuser-claims-1080537324.html
https://torontosun.com/news/world/jeffrey-epstein-wanted-tanned-petite-prepubescent-bodies-virginia-roberts Ratmanny (talk) 10:52, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You have put it straight back again even though it was pointed out that this was a claim made by Virginia Giuffre, not a proven fact. Also, the other sources are largely irrelevant WP:CITEKILL because they do not relate to the diet. This is also running into problems with due weight by putting this in the lead section without pointing out that this is simply a claim by Giuffre. I can't see why there is an obsession with adding this in the same form repeatedly after the problems were pointed out to you. This is a claim that Giuffre made in a podcast,[2] it is not really a reliable source.--♦IanMacM (talk to me) 11:44, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's why in the previous version I wrote "according to Virginia Roberts Giuffre, an alleged victim of Epstein", wasn't ok even written that way? Ratmanny (talk) 15:27, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please suggest a place to put it that isn't in the lead section. I removed it mainly because I agreed with Ianmacm's comment: it doesn't belong in the lead. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 15:32, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is I don't know in what section to put it besides the lead. I mean, I could put the part of how he used to prefer his victims in the lead and the testimony of Virginia Giuffre in the Legal proceeding section but I don't know where specifically. Ratmanny (talk) 15:38, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well? Ratmanny (talk) 07:42, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well what? If you can't find a place for it in the body, that's not an argument in favor of dumping it in the first paragraph... Nomoskedasticity (talk) 09:35, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you add it to the first paragraph again, you will likely be blocked. – Muboshgu (talk) 14:59, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The WP:LEAD should not contain orphaned statements. These are statements that appear only in the lead and do not appear elsewhere in the article. There has been a problem here with adding material to the lead section simply to ensure that it appears prominently in the article, but that is not what the lead section is there for. The lead is simply a summary of what appears later on in the article.--♦IanMacM (talk to me) 17:12, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jeffrey_Epstein&oldid=1227949506"

Categories: 
Wikipedia controversial topics
Wikipedia articles that use American English
Wikipedia In the news articles
Pages in the Wikipedia Top 25 Report
B-Class vital articles
Wikipedia level-5 vital articles
Wikipedia vital articles in People
B-Class level-5 vital articles
Wikipedia level-5 vital articles in People
B-Class vital articles in People
B-Class biography articles
WikiProject Biography articles
B-Class WikiProject Business articles
Low-importance WikiProject Business articles
WikiProject Business articles
B-Class Crime-related articles
Mid-importance Crime-related articles
B-Class Organized crime articles
Low-importance Organized crime articles
Organized crime task force articles
WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography articles
B-Class Death articles
Mid-importance Death articles
B-Class Finance & Investment articles
Low-importance Finance & Investment articles
WikiProject Finance & Investment articles
B-Class New York City articles
Low-importance New York City articles
WikiProject New York City articles
B-Class Sexology and sexuality articles
Low-importance Sexology and sexuality articles
WikiProject Sexology and sexuality articles
B-Class United States articles
Low-importance United States articles
B-Class United States articles of Low-importance
B-Class Cape Cod and the Islands articles
Mid-importance Cape Cod and the Islands articles
WikiProject Cape Cod and the Islands articles
WikiProject United States articles
Hidden categories: 
Noindexed pages
Wikipedia pages with contentious topic restrictions without a placed date
Wikipedia pages about contentious topics
Pages in the Wikipedia Top 50 Report
 



This page was last edited on 8 June 2024, at 17:23 (UTC).

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License 4.0; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.



Privacy policy

About Wikipedia

Disclaimers

Contact Wikipedia

Code of Conduct

Developers

Statistics

Cookie statement

Mobile view



Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki