Talk:Johan Staël von Holstein

BLPN

There is a discussion about this article at the Biographies of Living Persons Noticeboard.Anythingyouwant (talk) 13:50, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

References' "Accessed On"

Why remove this? − Safety Cap (talk) 05:12, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

vanity-bio

Ok, this article is basically too long, and too biased. Right now it reads like a promotional bio for some commercial product. I think the Swedish version of the article is more appropriate in scope.

Especially the Acknowledgement is just full of subjective praise.

All the various lists are also an eye-sore here: some summarizing is in order.

Compared to many other (truly) notable Swedes, like Afzelius, Kamprad, etc, this is just disproportionately extensive.

Andailus (talk) 13:40, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

This is so biased. It fails to point to the fact that he has failed with every project: http://www.thelocal.se/22032/20090911/ http://www.telecompaper.com/news/iconmedialab-swedish-office-bankrupt Who voted for him as "best speaker"? I get the feeling that he has made this page himself — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.254.56.7 (talk) 09:58, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Johan Staël von Holstein. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.asiaone.com/Business/News/SME%2BCentral/Story/A1Story20090320-129897.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110719014329/http://www.resume.se/nyheter/2008/12/17/stael-von-holstein-kickad-/ to http://www.resume.se/nyheter/2008/12/17/stael-von-holstein-kickad-/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:10, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Johan Staël von Holstein. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110722153517/http://www.banqueinvik.lu/ to http://www.banqueinvik.lu/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101119054524/http://incredibleurope.com/speakers.html to http://www.incredibleurope.com/speakers.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101124132833/http://www.todayonline.com/Tech/EDC101008-0000039/Virtual-market-square to http://www.todayonline.com/Tech/EDC101008-0000039/Virtual-market-square

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:49, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Crowd1

John beta, could you link those sources please? Vermont (talk) 18:23, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

IQube

What is an incubator please? Does this company hatch chickens?Spinney Hill (talk) 09:08, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Nobody has offered any kind of reply so I have "been bold" and deleted this Spinney Hill (talk) 08:14, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

MyCube

Can somebody rephrase this please?. It appears to be written in English but might as well be in Sumerian cuneiform.Spinney Hill (talk) 09:08, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

The current text gives the impression that it was a scam. Someone set up a company using promising buzzwords, so as to extract money from investors, and then kept the money. The company never actually did anything. (I have no way of knowing whether that's what actually happened in this instance.) Maproom (talk) 22:03, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Nobody apart from Maproom has offered any kind of reply so I have "been bold" and deleted this Spinney Hill (talk) 08:15, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Crowd1

collapsing discussion started by a paid editor who has been blocked for socking
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
A discussion is going on in Teahouse. Please refer to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Teahouse#I_need_help_regarding_possible_vandalism%21 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ablasaur (talk • contribs) 19:27, 16 November 2020 (UTC) No, this page is where you bring up content questions about this article, not the Teahouse. --bonadea contributions talk 20:18, 16 November 2020 (UTC) So... in that Teahouse post you state that an "unofficial" YouTube channel was used in a misleading manner – how did you draw the conclusion that the channel is unofficial? It certainly looks like the official company channel. But let's not use it anyway, it is a primary source – it is much better to use secondary sources discussing the primary one. Such as the ones that are currently in the article, where the sentence "Staël von Holstein is the CEO of ICT group, the parent company of Crowd1, where he worked as a consultant", added by you, is wholly unsourced. There are two sources, neither of which mentions ICT Group, both of which say that he has been identified as the CEO of Crowd1, and both of which state that he has made claims of having been a consultant rather than the CEO, which neither source presents as a fact but simply as a (doubtful) claim. And, yes, the Norwegian source discusses the company YouTube channel (and other communication from the company). As for Aftonbladet, rather than using their paraphrase of the BBC story, the BBC story itself seems like an excellent source here. The short version is at https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-africa-54753151 , the full version ("Unmasking the Pyramid Kings: Crowd1 scam targets Africa") at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0EjjArvzXA . That is really the source we should be using here. --bonadea contributions talk 20:50, 16 November 2020 (UTC) Two other sources which are probably good (they are WP:RS publications discussing Staël von Holstein and Crowd1, specifically, and apparently in depth) – unfortunately I can't access them right now, but I'll add them here : https://www.breakit.se/artikel/25416/aer-crowd1-ett-pyramidspel-vi-granskar-techprofilen-johan-stael-von-holstein-nya-storsatsning https://www.svd.se/kandistatt-nar-crowd1-skulle-tysta-kritikerna The Crowd1 section does include a bit too much detail about the company as opposed to the person, perhaps. --bonadea contributions talk 21:23, 16 November 2020 (UTC) Hello bonadea, Thank you for your feedback, After a lot of Googling and reading a few articles, I noticed that reputable newspapers such as Aftonbladet in Sweden as well as in Crowd1’s blog, he is not mentioned as CEO of Crowd1. Therefore I decided that this piece of information needs to be updated. After translating the Swedish and the Norwegian sources in order to understand what was written, I deemed that they are reputable enough sources to change the fact that he is not the Crowd1 CEO. There are more sources where this is stated and implied, such as Crowd1’s blog and some other websites but decided to choose these 2 newspapers as citations. Crowd1 and the people involved seems to be a popular subject in many countries recently and there is lots of outdated information in Wikipedia, we ought to update some facts. Thanks for suggesting the BBC link, very helpful, I actually watched the documentary on YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0EjjArvzXA) and I have to admit although BBC and the journalist presents some information based on specific interviews and also some personal opinions (e.g. “they are all scammers!”), there is actually a part where the journalists mentions that they “put these allegations to Crowd1 who sent us a long reply”. So the BBC journalist from 45:55 of this YouTube video to about 48:00 is reading a printed reply from Crowd1 mentioning some key points. This is a BBC documentary and a BBC journalist reading an official answer coming from Crowd1, what is a better source than this? The BBC journalist is making it very clear. Specifically from 46:40 to 46:46 the journalist reads: “Johan Stael von Holstein denies being CEO for Crowd1”. I perceive this as an official statement and not some doubtful claim or assumption, this is what Wikipedia is about, to focus on content and cite sources that present facts, in this case this specific BBC video of more than 300,000 views that you suggested. Except for this person’s role, I would also like to add a part in the same paragraph about this BBC documentary and write a few lines on what they present etc, useful information for those looking up people involved with Crowd1 etc. Staying on this subject, the only website/ source where I could find Johan Stael von Holstein as the CEO of some company is https://impactct.com/about/our-people, the CEO of Impact Crowd Technology, a company based in Spain and not UAE, Dubai where Crowd1 is registered. This source and the part of the BBC video seem enough to justify my change and I would like to update this so it reflects these facts, plus to add a part about the BBC documentary and their report. Please let me know your thoughts :) Also, do you think the extra information about the company should be removed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ablasaur (talk • contribs) 17:48, 18 November 2020 (UTC) I disagree on several counts. Your interpretation of the Norwegian and Swedish sources are perhaps based on poor translation software, since the Norwegian source explicitly states that von Holstein has been identified as the CEO, and Aftonbladet (which is not always a particularly reliable source and I really wonder where you got the idea that it is "reputable") says nothing about the CEO-of-Crowd1 issue (but does say that he "is allegedly the CEO of the parent company"), and most of all it refers to the BBC documentary. And yes, the BBC journalist is indeed very clear – she identifies von Holstein as the CEO of Crowd1, and although she mentions the company's claims that none of the top people are actually part of the company leadership at all, she is definitely not presenting that as a fact, but shows how it is part of the communicative strategy of this business. Wikipedia is not the mouthpiece of companies, and we have good secondary sources so there's no need to fall back on a primary source and use that for original research. --bonadea contributions talk 23:35, 18 November 2020 (UTC) Hello bonadea Ablasaur (talk) 12:48, 20 November 2020 (UTC), Please go through my response: In the two sources used to identify Johan Staël von Holstein as the CEO of Crowd1 (Aftonbladet and E24) I just want some clarification. Aftonbladet: If Aftonbladet is not a reputable source, then why to use it as a reference? Aftonbladet however references BBC, which I also tried to do where the journalist reads a statement saying he denies being CEO. But you are saying I cannot use that to at least correct him being CEO of Crowd1’s parent company? E24: They are reporting that Johan denies being CEO of Crowd1 in a statement to the newspaper but are using Crowd1’s “official” YouTube channel and screenshot from their webpage to claim that he is? Isn’t that a primary source as well? Where do you draw a line between the information? The image/screenshot they have used has no source to it, which means it’s an edited one that anybody can do. There’s no video or Facebook post of him wishing for New Year and signing as the CEO, I couldn’t find a source, can you please provide one if you found? I have to disagree on several points: 1. You wrote “…the Norwegian source discusses the company YouTube channel (and other communication from the company)”. and then you write “…the Norwegian source explicitly states that von Holstein has been identified as the CEO.”. There are 100s of YouTube channels and Facebook pages created by Crowd1 Affiliates. Many of them have reproduced content it seems and also edited pictures, films etc. adding comments, text, various graphics, various links to other sites etc. The official Crowd1 Channel on YouTube is this: https://www.youtube.com/c/CROWD1Official/about While the link previously mentioned in this Wikipedia article as a source was from this video (which you think is the official channel): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTBRcU5WqSw It is obviously from a different channel, probably some affiliate. The Norwegian source (https://e24.no/naeringsliv/i/EWgpoG/nektet-for-aa-vaere-sjef-i-pyramidespill-saa-kom-nyttaarshilsenen) Mentions the reply of Johan to them (article published January 2020): – Jeg er ikke CEO i selskapet, men har blitt leid inn for å holde foredrag og bidra strategisk mot en fremtidig lansering. Det skrev Johan Staël von Holstein til E24 i november i fjor. Translated from Norwegian to English: “I am not the CEO in the company but I have been hired to give lectures and contribute strategically towards a future launch.” Johan Staël von Holstein wrote this to E24 in November last year.” Meaning that already from November 2019 he has written to them that he is NOT the CEO. Then they post an edited image of him wishing for the new year and signing as the CEO. There is no source for this picture. I tried a Google Image Search and uploaded the image from the Norwegian source, which showed among the results a Facebook group of some affiliate (there is an obvious sign up link in the footer of the text). The rest of the results were associated with “champagne glasses” so irrelevant. This is the link to the Facebook post: https://www.facebook.com/102047407950839/photos/a.123596702462576/123599109129002/. So probable the Norwegian source did not do their work finding quality sources justifying this? Who knows but there is no other source of it, feel free to share if you find anything. The newspaper also claims that they followed up regarding this image and “New Year’s greetings” and he answered to them again: “– Jeg har utført konsulentoppdrag for Crowd1 gjennom høsten for å sørge for at selskapet skal bli transparent og fremfor alt overholde alle lover og forordninger i samtlige av de 170 landene der Crowd1 har virksomhet. “ Translated from Norwegian, “I have performed consulting assignments for Crowd1….” Where exactly is any proof in this source that he is the CEO of Crowd1? Except for an edited image, wholly unsourced, he denies it twice in the communication he had with the website/ newspaper and they post both his replies, about a year ago. So there are 2 replies that come directly from him and one edited image, both replies deny being CEO and the newspaper publishes both of them. 2. You wrote “….the BBC story itself seems like an excellent source here. The short version is at https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-africa-54753151 , the full version ("Unmasking the Pyramid Kings: Crowd1 scam targets Africa") at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0EjjArvzXA . That is really the source we should be using here” Then you ignore the fact that the journalist is reading official company statement but you comment: “the BBC journalist is indeed very clear – she identifies von Holstein as the CEO of Crowd1, and although she mentions the company's claims that none of the top people are actually part of the company leadership at all, she is definitely not presenting that as a fact, but shows how it is part of the communicative strategy of this business.” This is an interpretation based on the personal opinion of the journalist. (Not to mention there are thousands of journalists, if each and every word they said was true, then Wikipedia would be a chaos). Isn’t a company statement a fact about the company’s structure and the position of a person in a company? What else is more official? The opinion/ interpretation of a journalist? Your statement: “...it is part of the communicative strategy of this business…” That’s again a personal opinion, unsourced. The journalist also calls Johan Staël von Holstein and some other people involved “scammers” (watch the video at 47:46-47:50), do we have the right to use her personal opinion and tag everyone as “scammer?” Is Wikipedia about personal opinions of journalists or Wikipedia members? Then we might as well edit millions of articles in Wikipedia of politicians, athletes, actors, VIPs and so on based on what journalists on BBC, CNN or other media outlets have said. 3. Is it allowed to accept the company’s official YouTube channel as a source ? (you mentioned it - although there are 100s of different channels and the video could be an edited version because I couldn’t find an official video stating this) but it’s not allowed to accept the fact that BBC is reading an official statement of the company on an official BBC video with more than 300,000 views? In general, There are more legit sources available online claiming that Johan Stael von Holstein is the CEO of Impact Crowd Technology rather than CEO of Crowd1, video from Crowd1’s official channel about a recent event a few days ago, November 2020, check at 1:08:55, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbx-4tsvO7A He is presented as, CEO OF IMPACT CROWD TECHNOLOGY. The BBC journalist reading the official reply coming from Crowd1 46:40 to 46:46 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0EjjArvzXA, a video posted November 1, more than 300,000 views. The company website https://impactct.com/about/our-people of Impact Crowd Technology. A company directory from Spain, that was also shown on the BBC video (see 45:33) This source shows ( https://librebor.me/borme/empresa/impact-crowd-technology/ ) Johan Stael von Holstein as the CEO of Impact Crowd Technology. Nothing mentioned about Crowd1, I searched but could not find a source proving this except for claims and personal opinions. So let’s please stick to the facts and not personal opinions and interpretations. If you still disagree with this, then we should have a subject expert’s opinion ☺! Thank you! @Ablasaur: I left a note on your talk page so please disclose your paid editing status per WP:DISCLOSEPAY before making any further edit. GSS 💬 12:54, 20 November 2020 (UTC) Wikipedia should use secondary sources especially for contested information. We will not use Crowd1's own press releases and certainly not draw our own conclusions (original research) based on any primary sources, when we do have secondary sources. We also do not cherry-pick isolated parts of secondary sources, such as the exact seconds where the journalist reads the statement, and ignore the fact that this is discussed and problematised by that journalist, both earlier and later in the programme – that would be highly unethical! Just like it would be to cherry-pick a small part of the Norwegian source; using that source to say that he is definitely not the CEO would mean that we claimed the exact opposite of what the source actually says. Multiple other sources use terms such as "frontfigur" (which roughly means "front person" or "figurehead"), and maybe it would be better to use something like that; the relevant information is that he is one of the top people in charge (which is undeniably the case, based on multiple secondary sources), and whether the title is CEO, Pooh-Bah, or something else is less important. --bonadea contributions talk 14:28, 20 November 2020 (UTC) Hello bonadea Ablasaur (talk), I agree with the following suggestion: “Multiple other sources use terms such as "frontfigure" (which roughly means "front person" or "figurehead"), and maybe it would be better to use something like that." So, my suggestion is to change it according to your suggestion as: "He is one of the front people of the multi-level marketing company Crowd1, which has been identified as an illegal pyramid scheme in a number of countries." and also in the Crowd1 paragraph "In 2019, Staël von Holstein was identified as one of the front people of the multi-level marketing company Crowd1." Here we can use the same sources plus adding BBC's documentary. I would also like to update the paragraph about Crowd1 and add this in the end, BBC Africa aired during November 2020 an episode called "Unmasking the Pyramid Kings: Crowd1 scams targets Africa" where they unveiled more information about Crowd1 and their activities in Africa. Source -> the YouTube video. What do you think? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ablasaur (talk • contribs) 18:59, 20 November 2020 (UTC) @Bonadea, as per some off-wiki evidence there is a case of block evasion and sockpuppetry so I would like to request you to hold on reviewing their request. Thank you, GSS 💬 19:02, 20 November 2020 (UTC) @GSS: Yes, of course. Thanks for the heads-up. --bonadea contributions talk 19:17, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Undeclared paid editing

Ablasaur, who started the section above, has been blocked for using multiple accounts (about 25 different sockpuppets were identified by a CU) to make undeclared paid edits. Looking at the edit history of this article, it is very clear that there's been repeated attempts to promote the person the article is about, and to remove well-sourced information that is not unambiguously promotional and positive. A number of different single-purpose accounts have been doing this, and it is not very likely that those are regular volunteer editors like the rest of us. Hence the "undeclared paid" template. --bonadea contributions talk 23:23, 28 November 2020 (UTC)