Talk:Daniel Lapin

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Portal:Biography
 Biography Portal
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ]

Contents

[edit] Bad link

http://www.seattleweekly.com/features/0534/050824_news_mossback.php

THE LINK TO MY BLOG-POST; "RABBI DANIEL LAPIN: A LONG LOOK BACKWARD" IS INCOMPLETE IT SHOULD BE http://blatherwatch.blogs.com/talk_radio/2005/05/rabbi_daniel_la.html

I fixed it; there was a missing space after "html". John Broughton 20:30, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What this article is not

This article is not:

  • A place to violate Wikipedia's rules against libel.
  • A stalking horse for POV pushers with an axe to grind against the subject.
  • A place to vent about Jack Abramoff.
  • An article that needs multiple external links not related to the main subject.
  • A place to launch complaints against the Republicans.
  • A data base for unverified information about the subject.

Thanks. IZAK 21:04, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] IZAK's removal of relevant info from this page

Your edits do not reflect a NPOV. The allegations of money laundering and the like published in major media like the Washington Post and the Seattle Times do not constitute libel, and there is no justification for removing them. As per the Wikipedia policy, each of these items was referenced through the citation of reliable published sources. If you have other sources that contradict these, then publish them, or cease and desist your edits.

  • Hey buddy, what's with the no User name?: How about signing with a real Wikipedia name with the four tildes ~~~~ ? Otherwise it may be assumed that you are just a muckraker Internet troll more interested in causing mischief, harm and mayhem by attacking people than in contributing genuinely NPOV information fit for an authentic encyclopia. IZAK 10:23, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
IZAK - If the folks who run wikipedia assumed that anyone posting via IP address only were always as problematical as you describe, they would have banned anonymous editing. They did not. If you want this wikipedia policy changed (to eliminate muckrackers, those who want to cause mischief, harm, and mayhem), then I suggest you take the matter to the Village pump. Otherwise, I think it is more constructive if you don't do personal attacks on anonymous posters.
More to the point: I don't agree with your last three edit changes (essentially, REMOVING material), and would like you to explain why you did that. In particular, I would like you to cite ANY wikipedia policy that "7 links is plenty for an article of this size."
Please note that selective removal of negative materials is NOT NPOV. John Broughton 20:17, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
  • John: Here is the largest disputed passage:
Allegations of money laundering: The Washington Post reported on October 16, 2005, that Lapin's religious charity received a $25,000 donation in 2000 from online gambling company eLottery, a lobbying client of Jack Abramoff and his employer, Preston Gates Ellis, despite Lapin's professed opposition to gambling. Some or all of the money received by Lapin was then laundered into a company run by the wife of Tony Rudy, the Tom DeLay aide who was instrumental in killing an antigambling bill that eLottery and Abramoff were lobbying against. In an interview, Lapin claimed not to remember any donations from eLottery and stated that Rudy was paid for helping to organize a conference. However, this contradicted Robert Daum, a former eLottery official, who said that all the money spent by the company at Abramoff's direction was for the purpose of defeating the Internet gambling bill in Congress.
In a followup article published by the Washington Post on January 9, 2006, Lapin was implicated in additional money laundering that was revealed when Toward Tradition was referred to as a "non-profit entity" in Abramoff's plea agreement. Howard Rubinstein of Magazine Publishers of America, which had hired Abramoff's firm Preston Gates Ellis in 2000 for a $10 million campaign against the postal rate increase, revealed that the MPA made a $25,000 contribution to Lapin's group Toward Tradition in 2000. Lapin claimed that he and his board had no idea the money was part of Abramoff's scheme to influence Congress and, in this case, stop bills to raise postal rates and ban online lotteries. (Seattle Times on January 9, 2006

These two pragraphs are riddled with ambiguities and innuendos, regardless if it's from newspaper reporters (since they are certainly not infallible). A few points: The section of "Allegations of money laundering" reads more like "Proof" of money laundering when nothing of the sort has been proven. So when there is a line like "Some or all of the money received by Lapin was then laundered into a company run by the wife of Tony Rudy" the whole section is suspect and must go until such time as this is established as real fact and not presented as if it actually happened. And when it says: "Lapin claimed that he and his board had no idea the money was part of Abramoff's scheme to influence Congress" it's written in an accusatory style winking at the reader to simply assume that something wrong had actually happened when nothing has been established as a neutral fact. There are many of these innuendos and half-truths abounding in this segment based on newspaper articles that are not reporting facts but merely digging for dirt at this point, so for now it needn't get such prominence.

Similarly, Lapin has denied what is stated here as coming from "National Public Radio reported in July 2005" "that Abramoff listed the following awards on his biography. Scholar of Biblical and American History, 1994, from Lapin's organization Toward Tradition. Biblical Mercantile Award, 1999, from the Cascadia Business Institute, another creation of Rabbi Lapin."

Then, the number of links were just repeating accusations that a more limited number of links perform just as well. All this is quite normal in a day's editing on Wikipedia and doesn't require any grand reasoning...unless one is out to "bury" Rabbi Lapin before he has even been formally charged with any crime of any sort whatsoever. If and when that would maybe ever happen, then some of the "charges" here can be listed, until then they can be dismissed as elaborate fairy tales not far removed from slander and libel.

Finally, I did not merely go about deleting things as you make it sound, I also added [1] important basic information about Lapin that a truly NPOV editor should have been doing, and not just looking for "skeletons in closets." IZAK 09:53, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

  • IZAK - thanks for the informative response. I also agree that the language that you cite is sloppy at best, and needs, at minimum, to be shortened and edited. But Abramoff DID send money through Lapin's charity; that's a fact. And Abramoff DID cite awards from Lapin's organization; that's another fact.
When I find a bit of time, I'm going to try to rewrite at least some of the deleted materials (and add them back) in briefer and hopefully NPOV language. I also hope to find time to look at the deleted links, and make the case for any that I think do add to a reader's knowledge, when followed. You're certainly right that redundant links are unnecessary (the same news story in ten different papers, on a bunch of bloggers fulminating on the same thing), but there isn't anything magical about seven.
And I certainly welcome someone else offering revised wording. John Broughton 23:56, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Another round of editing

Quoting Daniel Lapin in a biography on Daniel Lapin and taking up over 1/3 of the article with his quotes serve little purpose other than to characterize out of context or even in context a vague idea of his political ideas as imagined by his opponents. Secondly, in fact David Lapin taught Abramoff Talmud and Jewish Law. Guy Montag 06:21, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree. I would dearly like to see the context of some of these quotes before they are included. Sholom 16:56, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
Addressing only the second point - I moved the tutoring information out of the awards section (where it is speculation) to the relationship section. I also changed the section title back to "Fake awards". No one is denying that the awards are fake, which is much more important than that awards were "requested". A reader scanning only the section titles might well think that the request for awards was legitimate, or that the request was met by a polite refusal. John Broughton 18:43, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
Questions:
(1) what is the point of the section titled "Judaism is a non-proselytizing religion." ? Lapin's view here are so standard as to make a Jew yawn. It has the same novelty as something like "Lapin believes Jews should have a seder on Passover."
(2) what is the point of most of the stuff in the section: "Allies"? Yes, we know that Lapin is a convservative religious Republican who finds things in common with conservative Christian religioun Republicans.
    • And (shocking!) "Lapin has had breakfast with Karl Rove". So what? Is this an attempt at character-assassination-by-association?
    • "Lapin often flew east to stay with Republican lobbyist and soon-to-be-convicted felon Jack Abramoff" adds nothing to the article, particularly since the very next large section is called "Abramoff".
Can we remove much of this? Sholom 19:29, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Re (1), yes, I'd vote to remove the "Judaism is a non-proselytizing religion" section.

Re (2), I'd vote to remove the Abramoff sentence, but to leave in the Karl Rove sentence. I think that wikipedia articles can be helpful by providing context, and context includes who-knows-whom. Relatively few people have breakfast with Karl Rove. Similarly, most people don't have Zig Ziglar as a guest, and I think that should also stay in the article. As far as character-assassination-by-association, I think that the reader should be left to judge what breakfast with KR means. John Broughton 19:37, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm happy you partially agree with me. As for breakfast with KR, does everybody who's had breakfast with him have it mentioned? Further, Lapin has also had dinner with Delay, Ralph Reed, Bush, Pia Zadora, Burgess Meredith. He's consulted with Barbra Streisand. Should all that be mentioned, too? (Fwiw, I found the source of more than half the quotes in the article -- it's at [2]) Sholom 19:58, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Business guru

OK -- next issue. The article asserts: "Though he portrays himself as a business guru," . . . is there a source for that? -- Sholom 04:08, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

I did a google search, and this popped up:
Daniel Lapin is an unlikely business guru. He doesn't have an MBA or a distinguished record of financial wizardry. His largest venture into the world of commerce, running a firm that traded in second mortgages, ended in bankruptcy court, with Lapin owing nearly $3 million. Yet this history hasn't stopped Lapin from dispensing business wisdom, and it hasn't stopped corporations from paying him thousands of dollars to give motivational speeches. [3] John Broughton 17:34, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for finding that. I clicked on the link, and as I'm not a subscriber to TNR, I see only your quote and one other sentence -- which is: That's because Lapin draws on another source of authority when making his presentations to executives: his yarmulke..... It makes it seem like businesses hired him to make motivational speeches. Indeed, I know that part of Lapin's message in business is to act ethically. (Which certainly isn't reflected in our article here!). The main question stands -- is there a source for the claim that he himself portrays himself as a business guru? -- Sholom 18:10, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
The best source to document Lapin claiming to be a successful business guru/consultant is his 2002 book Thou Shall Prosper: Ten Commandments for Making Money. The inside flap claims Lapin is a 'renowned business consultant'. The back flap notes he is President of the Cascadia Business Institute and gives more than fifty speeches annually to major corporations. The Publishers Weekly review notes "Lapin offers a manual on how to make money by succeeding in business". A quote from Zig Ziglar from the back cover states "Rabbi Daniel Lapin's wisdom has helped untold numbers of people, including me, grow in in our business, family and spiritual lives...". It's not clear if any of this is actually documented given Lapin's business history. At the time the book was published, the Cascadia Business Institute appears to have been inactive. A reader. 2nd March 2006

[edit] African-American

Daniel Lapin should be identified as an African-American. Lapin was born in Africa (Johannesburg, South Africa) and he is now an American (he became a naturalized citizen of the United States in 1973).

72.82.177.101 02:18, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Give me a break. "African-American" is an ethnic/racial term, not a geographical one. marbeh raglaim 02:37, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

  • I understand what Marbeh is saying; however, Africa is a place, not a race or ethnicity. The term African-American is a bunch of PC BS for the reasons implied by 72.82.177.101. 4.243.227.195 19:00, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../d/a/n/Talk%7EDaniel_Lapin_984f.html"