Talk:Ronn Torossian/Archive 6

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Politics

When is the "discussion" above about politics going to be closed? Jytdog removed the entire section a month back for talk page discussion, did not respond when pinged about it after two weeks, but has immediately reverted my edit to the article which mentions Torossian's political activism in the infobox. Maybe someone else can take a look and see if there is enough case to include his political activism in the article? FireflySixtySeven (talk) 16:59, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for being patient, and sorry for not getting back to this sooner. I reviewed this. As somebody noted above, the "lying" thing was a bit over the top and without context. I found that article and reported other, more salient stuff out of it, and added some more content. I also re-arranged it to make it chronological. It would be good if we could source the statement "He regularly publishes opinion pieces in the New York Post, The New York Observer and The Jewish Press." to some secondary source. that is the one thing I am not too sure of. Jytdog (talk) 15:30, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

I was able to use the Likud spokesman thing. The other links there are dead. Jytdog (talk) 13:54, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Absolute untruths and non links in the article and the politics section should be removed as per edits. One user Jytdog posted it and theres been no consensus for it.

Further, 5W has no office in Israel and the source does not support what is written there.

Source for 25, 26 & 27 is not a Wikipedia approved real news source. 1995 Jewish Week source - A: There's no link and B: Its supposedly a group I ran, not something I did. 28, 29, 30 - No links, and I was a spokesman for an organization, not dissimilar to a spokesman now for issues (cabs, police, etc.)

All the rest there's no links or its press releases. There's no consensus for this and it should be removed immediately., RONN TOROSSIAN — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.254.85.130 (talk) 01:27, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for talking. Thanks for clarifying the practice directed to israeli companies - yep not an office in israel. i added one URL and quotes to sources only on lexisnexus. Jytdog (talk) 01:43, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

A press release is not a source and that section should be removed.

inaccurate BLP sections must be removed immediately or you are in violation of Wikipedia. There are not links on these stories, and they are not shown. Press releases are not approved, nor are the stories you have there. Per Wikipedia remove immediately. You cannot use press releases and you cannot use stuff without links, Theres no links. you also did not discuss it on this page as required. Remove immediately per Wikipedia rules. 165.254.85.130 (talk) 01:54, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

If you want politics, lead with the Likud

Says here I represented both Ehud Olmert & Benyamin Netanyahu when they were Prime Ministers: http://www.thejewishweek.com/features/confident_comeback Easy to translate this from Globes Israels most respected business publication: http://67.199.80.177/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/ronn_torossian_globes_israel.pdf http://www.thejewishweek.com/features/legacybuilding_time_olmert

Ronn Torossian representing left wing university Ben Gurion University: http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2003/02/18/155371.html Worked closely with Prime Minister Olmert – he wasn’t considered a right wing prime minister @ all: http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/517134/ 2007 – Trained Israeli government officials during PM Olmerts’ tenure – not right wing: http://www.thejewishweek.com/features/inside_israel%E2%80%99s_image_war

Further, you don't have sources for what you say that are accurate. Israel practice is a non factor and a press release. No independent source. you are cherry picking. No 3rd party source.

Also, Is the Davidoff article a worthy source? if so there's some great praise make sure its adapted. Also I assume that Our Jerusalem will be removed and Likud will be added correct. Those are 20+ year old sources. I am 40 years old - those are relevant with 1 source for each of those and many are inaccurate?? RONN TOROSSIAN 165.254.85.130 (talk) 01:57, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks there is some good stuff there! I am going to see a movie now - will incorporate stuff from those links in the morning. Jytdog (talk) 02:01, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

IT SHOULD ALL BE REMOVED THERE IS NO CONSENSUS FOR THESE EDITS. NO DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS AT ALL.

INACCURATE AND UNRELEVANT: At age 13, at the insistence of his mother, Torossian joined Betar, the Zionist youth movement.[25] He was an active member of the organization for 10 years, and its national president from 1994 to 1996, and continued to fund them afterwards.[25][26] He says he is guided Ze'ev Jabotinsky's teachings in his financial and personal life.[25] His view of Judaism was shaped by his Betar experience.[25] THIS IS ABOUT A GROUP I WAS A MEMBER OF - NOT WHAT I DID??? According to a report in [The Jewish Week]] in 1995, under Torossian's leadership RZA bought Binyamin Ze'ev Kahane to speak at the campus, burned Palestinian flags, and "burned Palestinian flags on the state Capitol steps, accused the black SUNY Albany president, Patrick Swygert...of anti-Semitism, and in general have 'exacerbated racial tensions on campus,'" according to Malcolm Sherman, president of the Albany Community Relations Council and a math professor.[27]

NO SOURCE AND INACCURATE: In 1994, during the Nobel Prize award ceremony in Oslo, Torossian was arrested for protesting against Yasser Arafat being awarded the Peace Prize.[28] In 1995, Torossian, as a member of the Coalition for Jewish Concerns-Amcha, disrupted the rally where Pat Buchanan launched his presidential bid, holding a sign that said, "Buchanan Is a Racist".[29][30] Torossian, a follower of Rabbi Avi Weiss, criticized Howard University president Patrick Swygert for his failure to "clamp down" anti-semitism on campus, and claimed that Swygert had "allowed Jewish students to be intimidated by black students and... taken no action".[31] Torossian claimed he and other Jewish students had been "verbally abused and physically threatened" by black students while staging a counterdemonstration against a black student rally in support of the Million Man March.[32] Torossian sued the police because they had prevented him from demonstrating at the rally, claiming his First and Fourth Amendment rights had been violated.[33]

WRONG - WORKED FOR LIKUD AND NO SOURCE: After completing his undergraduate degree in 1995[34] he moved to Israel for a master's degree, but quit his studies after some time to found Yerushalyim Shelanu (Our Jerusalem), an organization which promoted Jewish settlement in Eastern Jerusalem.[6][35] He and his organization began making news for protesting whenever they perceived injustice against Jewish people.[25]

THIS SHOULD BE REMOVED IMMEDIATELY AS PER WIKI RULES. ITS WRONG AND THERE WAS NO DISCUSSION JUSTIFYING. and theres no sources? and its 20 years old. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.254.85.130 (talk) 02:04, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Please keep in mind that this article is a biography of you. It is not just about your professional work. As far as I can see the section is accurate and well sourced; it seems that from a young age you were inspired by Ze'ev Jabotinsky and even just a few months ago you wrote an editorial advocating his views and writing about him and his relevance just a month ago. It's a coherent story and very well-sourced. I do not understand what you are objecting to. If you have sources that create a different story, please bring them. Calmly. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 14:02, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

If Mr. Torossian were as concerned about Wikipedia's rules as he claims, he would recognize that he's banned from editing Wikipedia, which includes talk pages. Rather, he should follow the advice given here and contact OTRS via email at info-en-qwikimedia.org. Offline sources are entirely acceptable, and the age of the sources is not a concern unless there were newer sources explicitly contradicting the old ones. Claiming "no source" for a paragraph that cites no less than six sources is utterly unpersuasive, as is shouting "INACCURATE" without pointing out what exactly is inaccurate, or how it is inaccurate. Huon (talk) 15:18, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

I have removed some press releases, replacing them by more reliable third-party sources where possible. (The part on his opinion pieces is due to Haaretz, the source cited at the end of that paragraph.) I also reworded the garbled sentence about the flag-burning, but I didn't have access to its source and would ask someone with access to double-check whether I didn't attribute too little to Malcolm Sherman. I felt no need to quote the Jewish Week and have shortened that part of the sentence. Huon (talk) 20:04, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

I do email that address and no one emails back.

no one says I burned a flag - remove that. And I was a spokesman for an organization protesting. Why is that any different than a spokesman for companies today. I was a spokesman for likud when you have this Our Jerusalem wrongly. The whole thing is overkill if fact matters. And why are there still press releases as sources. THIS IS WHOLY NOT TRUE: In 2014 5W launched a practice focused in Israeli companies. At that time it already represented 20 Israeli companies[19] and the government of Israel.[20]

Why are these unrelevant yet they are more prominent than Israel? http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2012/03/22/big-reacti... http://thejewishreporter.com/2012/03/22/tim-teb... http://www.charismanews.com/opinion/33051-tim-t... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltUESzLJ1Z4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPy3ib7SX-s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEmTC9Mxhjc http://globalnews.ca/news/268464/q-a-the-impact... http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2012/07/20... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JksiMYHVrMg http://insights.wired.com/profile/RonnTorossian... http://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/dec/16/hi... http://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20140604/morris... http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/20/nyregion/thec... http://www.davidovit.com/articles/Torossian.pdf http://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20140604/morris... http://www.vibe.com/2011/11/5wpr-founder-chats-...

EVERY NEWSPAPER IN WORLD COVERED THIS STORY AND HAD 5W IN IT: http://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/dec/16/high-school-senior-who-claimed-fake-72m-fortune-releases-video-apology

HUGE NEWS STORY - WAY BIGGER THAN NEW ISRAEL HUNDREDS OF PAPERS: http://www.newsweek.com/free-cab-rides-emergency-responders-during-blizzard-nyc-302028

ME ON IHOP IN NEW YORK - http://therealdeal.com/blog/2011/10/11/ihop-to-take-space-in-chelsea-s-limelight-ashkenazy-acquisition-controls-both-pancake-franchisee-and-building/ MONOPOLY IN NEW YORK: http://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20110214/manhattan/sightseeing-bus-company-declared-monopoly

What I fail to understand is this stuff from 20 years ago being more prominent than what I am noteable for. RONN TOROSSIAN — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:2000:1444:20A0:CC53:5B41:BF2F:696A (talk) 00:48, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

WHY IS THIS HERE? THERE IS NOT EVEN A SOURCE FOR IT???? Under Torossian's leadership RZA brought Binyamin Ze'ev Kahane to speak at the campus in 1995, burned Palestinian flags, accused the black SUNY Albany president, Patrick Swygert, of anti-Semitism, and "exacerbated racial tensions on campus," according to Malcolm Sherman, president of the Albany Community Relations Council and a math professor.[27] REMOVE THIS ABSURD. NO SOURCE. DAMAGING LIES. RONN TOROSSIAN 2604:2000:1444:20A0:CC53:5B41:BF2F:696A (talk) 00:52, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Ronn Torossian commentary

Help please

This is inaccurate, and the source is a press release: In 2014 5W launched a practice focused in Israeli companies. At that time it already represented 20 Israeli companies[19] and the government of Israel.[20] Why is a quote from Goldberg & a gossip blog in my bio? Atlantic Monthly writer Jeffrey Goldberg called him "the most disreputable flack in New York", particularly criticizing his representation of what Goldberg called the "lunatic fringe" of right-wing Israeli politics.[21] Gawker’s Hamilton Nolan wrote that Torossian "embodies the public’s worst ideas about what a PR person is: loud, brash, more flash than substance, dirty, manipulative, amoral, and, in the end, not particularly bright."[22]

Politics This whole section is outsized. And I worked for the Likud during most of the ‘90s. Thats all thats needed i’d think for something i did when i was 20 years old. THIS IS UNTRUE ADN THERE IS NO SURCE FOR IT – AND EVEN THE SOURCE SAYS IT WAS AN ORGANIZATION. 5wpr was removed as it wasnt about me, yet this remains? Come on During his undergraduate days at SUNY Albany, he became an activist and advocate for Jewish people, became the head of Religious Zionists of America/Tagar (the youth wing of Betar), and developed a desire to become the Prime Minister of Israel.[25] Under Torossian's leadership RZA brought Binyamin Ze'ev Kahane to speak at the campus in 1995, burned Palestinian flags, accused the black SUNY Albany president, Patrick Swygert, of anti-Semitism, and "exacerbated racial tensions on campus," according to Malcolm Sherman, president of the Albany Community Relations Council and a math professor.[27] NO SOURCE: In 1994, during the Nobel Prize award ceremony in Oslo, Torossian was arrested for protesting against Yasser Arafat being awarded the Peace Prize.[28] In 1995, Torossian, as a member of the Coalition for Jewish Concerns-Amcha, disrupted the rally where Pat Buchanan launched his presidential bid, holding a sign that said, "Buchanan Is a Racist".[29][30] Torossian, a follower of Rabbi Avi Weiss, criticized Howard University president Patrick Swygert for his failure to "clamp down" anti-semitism on campus, and claimed that Swygert had "allowed Jewish students to be intimidated by black students and... taken no action".[31] Torossian claimed he and other Jewish students had been "verbally abused and physically threatened" by black students while staging a counterdemonstration against a black student rally in support of the Million Man March.[32] Torossian sued the police because they had prevented him from demonstrating at the rally, claiming his First and Fourth Amendment rights had been violated.[33]

THIS IS NOTHING ARE YOU KIDDING? WHAT WAS THE CONTROVERSY? In 2009, his politics created controversy for one of his clients, Birthright Israel, when it selected 5W to represent it.[6] In the course of reporting on that controversy,The Forward described Torossian as being "proud of his right-wing political beliefs" and quoted Jeffrey Goldberg, who formerly wrote for the Forward and who then wrote for The Atlantic Monthly, who said that Torossian "represents the hardest right on the Israeli spectrum."[6] I write for Huff Post, Wired Magazine and others – way more relevant: Torossian publishes opinion pieces in the New York Post, The New York Observer and The Jewish Press. Nothing to do with Pam Geller: In March 2015 he criticized the New Israel Fund in conjunction with a campaign by Pamela Geller over the NIF's stance on the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign.[36]

This whole thing makes no sense and is simply meant to harm me. 2604:2000:1444:20A0:CC53:5B41:BF2F:696A (talk) 01:00, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

"Contentious material about living persons... that is unsourced or poorly sourced – whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable – should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion...Biographies of living persons ("BLPs") must be written conservatively and with regard for the subject's privacy. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid: it is not Wikipedia's job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives; the possibility of harm to living subjects must always be considered when exercising editorial judgment. "' I contend that Gawker is questionable. I contend that I never ever made such an outrageous comment to Jeff Goldberg. Remove those untruths if you wish to follow Wikipedia rules. Further, I never burnt a flag in my life - and of course theres no source for it. people - stop obsessing and reflect reality. press releases are not valid sources. RONN TOROSSIAN 165.254.85.130 (talk) 03:11, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

• As I don't think this is a productive discussion, I recommend that Ronn Torossian contact WMF, instructions at Wikipedia:Contact us - Subjects as the subject of a Wikipedia BLP article. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 10:16, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. I have and no one has responded. Ronn Torossian 165.254.85.130 (talk) 10:17, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Ronn, the article does not say that you burned a flag. The article says that RZA did those things. Jytdog (talk) 10:23, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

So why would something a college student did as a member of an organization I was part of 20 years ago be in my bio? That is absurd and not reflective of me at all. Does not belong in my bio because some college student did something 20 years ago. If its not me remove it. 2604:2000:1444:20A0:CC53:5B41:BF2F:696A (talk) 11:16, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

The article NOW has no link at all. And if its not about me remove it. RONN TOROSSIAN2604:2000:1444:20A0:CC53:5B41:BF2F:696A (talk) 11:16, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

And in response specifically to Jytdog http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Ronn_Torossian/Archive_3#Suggested_sources - read here extensive discussion about why activities of 5wpr should not be on my bio page. So, let me understand, 5wpr - a company I founded and am noteable for cannot be on my page - but a college organization 20 years ago I was part of did something (not me) without a link on WIki - and that stays on my wiki page. Come on people. Ronn Torossian 165.254.85.130 (talk) 12:03, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Do you disagree with the description of you provided in the lifestylesmagazine.com profile? That article tells a very clear story that from about 13 you embraced Ze'ev Jabotinsky's teachings and they have guided your work and life - even just last month you wrote a column citing him. What you and the RZA organization you led is consistent with that. It is unclear why you would want to obfuscate that now. And please stop saying that if something doesn't have a link it needs to be removed - that is not true. The citation needs to be complete, and i have gone and found all the cited references in lexisnexus and they are all good. If you continue to clutter your posts with that, i will stop replying to you. Jytdog (talk) 13:17, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

And is comical to take negatives from lifestyles magazine.com which fawns over me and make it a negative article. Give me a break.

Provide a citation for this supposed flag burning. Cannot even read the citation. And no it does not embrace something i would do as i did not. Ronn Torossian 67.251.203.41 (talk) 14:05, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Provide the citation as I cannot read it. There is no way to verify what you claim. Provide the citation so it is clear. It is against Wiki to put in my bio something an organization i was a part of did. That simply is absurd to define my life via that. And no what a college organization may or may not have done when I was a member is not something that should be in my bio. Endless discussion says 5wpr does not belong in my bio. How can something some college kid did (Or didn't do since I cant even read the citation) define my life. Provide the link.

Further, I collect art, I play basketball - thats about as relevant for Wikipedia as is me embracing Ze'ev Jabotinsky who is considered a Zionist legend and Netanyahu's ideological heir. That is not what I am relevant for. Further, you seem to be cherry picking Lifestylesmagazine.com - take all of the positive quotes there why don't you? Ronn Torossian 67.251.203.41 (talk) 13:53, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

One's bio is not defined by what a college

Citation

Please provide citation for this. I cannot even verify what is written here. Where is citation? A link? "During his undergraduate days at SUNY Albany, he became an activist and advocate for Jewish people, became the head of Religious Zionists of America/Tagar (the youth wing of Betar), and developed a desire to become the Prime Minister of Israel.[25] Under Torossian's leadership RZA brought Binyamin Ze'ev Kahane to speak at the campus in 1995, burned Palestinian flags, accused the black SUNY Albany president, Patrick Swygert, of anti-Semitism, and "exacerbated racial tensions on campus," according to Malcolm Sherman, president of the Albany Community Relations Council and a math professor." And why would this be on my bio if its about an organization and not about me? Put it on RZA page. Ronn Torossian 67.251.203.41 (talk) 13:55, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

10 years ago NY Times ran a profile on me. Maybe 10% was Israel. Then was even more involved in Israel. Why does this bio focus on politics? And its wrong - I worked for Likud not these other groups. theres many sources:

http://www.davidovit.com/articles/Torossian.pdf - long feature in Lifestyles magazine http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/new_york/confident_comeback - TOROSSIAN REPRESENTED OLMERT AND SHARON. http://www.prweek.com/article/1258861/defiant-torossian-takes-pride-pushing-buttons http://news.investors.com/technology/031201-345097-international-relations-israeli-and-us-tech-industries-uneasy-as-sharon-era-begins.htm

hence, Likud would render Goldberg opinion unrelevant.

The larger point is I own a $20MM business - Thats what should be there.

Why is Pam Geller even there? I WROTE AN ARTICLE WITH NETANYAHU FORMER CHIEF OF STAFF AND A FORMER BILL CLINTON SPOKESPERSON - Never Pam Geller h http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/foreign-policy/235832-new-israel-fund-is-no-friend-of-israel

OPEDS ON TECHNOLOGY - http://insights.wired.com/profile/RonnTorossian HUGE NEWS STORY - http://www.newsweek.com/free-cab-rides-emergency-responders-during-blizzard-nyc-302028

http://61.129.118.78/Opinion/book-review/Business-Books-TOP-FIVE-US-Jun-15-2012/shdaily.shtml - top business book according to Shanghai Daily http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/20/nyregion/thecity/20feat.html?_r=0 Mr. Torossian is one of the New Yorkiest practitioners of this quintessentially New York profession

Impossible to counter when there is no one who is concerned about business. Read the links people. Hatchet. Ronn Torossian 67.251.203.41 (talk) 14:16, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

I have edited the statement about RZA to be closer to the source. It now reads: "During his undergraduate days at SUNY Albany, he became an activist and advocate for Jewish people, became the head of Religious Zionists of America/Tagar (the youth wing of Betar), and developed a desire to become the Prime Minister of Israel. RZA brought Binyamin Ze'ev Kahane to speak at the campus in 1993; the group burned Palestinian flags, accused the black SUNY Albany president, Patrick Swygert, of anti-Semitism, and "exacerbated racial tensions on campus," according to Malcolm Sherman, president of the Albany Community Relations Council and a math professor."

The source provided for the first sentence is the lifestyles magazine article and the Fax source (see below)

The source provided for the 2nd sentence is Fax, Julie Gruenbaum (March 3, 1995). "Money Crunch On Campus: Insufficient funding for Jewish programs at SUNY Albany". The New York Jewish Week. That is a full citation to a reliable source. Links are not required - the source is however available through LexisNexis which is now I accessed it. I also added a quote from it, to support the content: "Ronn Torossian wants $250,000 a year from the local federation to support Jewish students at SUNY Albany. And he wants it now. Well, OK, he concedes, maybe just a few full-time professionals and enough programing money for the group he heads, RZA/Tagar, to bring up all the big-name speakers they can fit into a semester.....Two years ago RZA put up advertisements for Binyamin Kahane's speech with the slogan "Every Jew A.22." The group has burned Palestinian flags on the state Capitol steps, accused the black SUNY Albany president, Patrick Swygert -- who one leader calls a "philo-Semite" -- of anti-Semitism, and in general have "exacerbated racial tensions on campus," says Malcolm Sherman, president of the Albany Community Relations Council and a math professor at the school."

All this is well-sourced and verified. Jytdog (talk) 14:34, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Information about this personality

Hi guys,

I was going through this personality online and found this information, where lot of controversial elements are added on a website i.e. www.gawker.com. Here is one story about Ronn Torossian http://gawker.com/365723/the-story-of-ronn-torossian.

I would strongly suggest to add this information inside the Wikipedia article because the users should know about both sides of the coin i.e positive as well as negative.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by John Mcnrow (talk • contribs) 12:23, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. You might like to read the sections above for extensive discussion of the Gawker material. --Dweller (talk) 12:49, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

I feel the need to address the perception of Gawker as a gossip blog. This was certainly true in the early days, when it was a one- or two-person operation that relied on anonymous tips. Today, it's a fully staffed site with a proper editorial process. And specific to this article, the Ronn Torrossian coverage comes from Hamilton Nolan, who covered the PR industry before joining Gawker. Of course, it's expected that Ronn's army of sock puppets would prefer to emphasize the site's past reputation (while simultaneously pleading with us to pretend the past didn't happen).

But if anything, Nolan's coverage of Torossian is likely to be more neutral and reliable than the slew of PR-pushed articles in the Times/Businessweek etc from the mid-00s. Mosmof (talk) 11:55, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Gawker is a blog site. If this is an encyclopedia why would someone opinion about me be part of a biography? And "the early days" would refer to when that article was written in 2007- 8 years ago.

This is inbalance and bias at its best. RONN TOROSSIAN 165.254.85.130 (talk) 12:01, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, it's a blog site! A blog is a publishing format that lays articles out in a vertical, chronological format! Many large publications have switched their websites to this format! This is a red herring! Stop repeating "this is just a blog" like it means something.

Also, if you're asking why someone's opinion matter in a section titled "Perception", I'm not sure what to tell you. Opinions are generally expected in biographical articles.

Finally, Gawker's shift in editorial style happened around 2006, 2007. Hiring of Hamilton Nolan was a major step in this direction. If anything, Nolan's coverage serves as a perfect counterbalance to the puff articles about 5W that popped up around this time. And I fail to see how Nolan is any more biased than the clearly PR-pushed profile pieces of that time. Mosmof (talk) 12:33, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi folks,

I also found one another controversial subject about this person. Last Year, one lawsuit was also filed against this guy regarding 'con artist' campaign on message boards. Here is the link to that story which was published on NYDailytimes: http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/gossip/confidential/pr-lawsuit-blasting-big-flack-article-1.1596031 and I believe that this should be a part of the Wikipedia page, so that users know each and everything about this person. Thanks!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by John Mcnrow (talk • contribs) 08:18, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

This story (with the same exact source) was added last year, then removed per WP:BLPCRIME. The source is gossipy in nature (there's even "gossip' in the URL!), and since the suit was filed in January 2014, there doesn't seem to be any development that would warrant including in the article. Mosmof (talk) 14:01, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Archiving this talk page

In light of the discussion at WP:ANI and related blocks, does it make sense to archive discussions initiated or derailed by Ronn and his sockpuppets? I know this page is automatically archived, but the bot doesn't make any distinction between unproductive users and otherwise, and it's hard to read this page right now. Mosmof (talk) 14:23, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Politics section removal

Drmies how about discussing this? I understand it is a convenient way to tamp down the ranting by the article's subject, but please do read this profile of Torossian and the very, very clear statement of there of his politics (if you don't know who Ze'ev Jabotinsky is see our article) - about which the article says: "Jabotinsky’s picture hangs in Torossian’s office. He has read all of Jabotinsky’s writings and says that his philosophies continue to guide all of his financial and personal decisions." Then have a look at some of his editorials (there are many, many of them):

• Torossian contributions to Arutz Sheva
• Torossian contributions to The New York Observer
• Torossian contributions to The Jewish Press
• Torossian contributions to Algemeiner Journal

and you will perhaps reconsider how important it is to cover politics, to give an adequate biography article of Torossian. I was opposed to this at first also, but the more I read, the most it was clear that the article has a huge hole in it, without this. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 03:04, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Not directly related to this topic, but a key point in the last few months of discussion - both Drmies and Torossian himself made the argument that he's notable as a PR exec and his political activism should be a footnote at most. I don't know if he is actually that notable as a businessman. For all its notoriety, 5W isn't that remarkable a PR agency. If you look at the sourcing, most of the deep-dive profiles come from his company's early years in the mid-'00s, back when it was doing its own PR work and pitching the "brash New Yorker has a PR agency with attitude" story to publications. Since then, it doesn't appear that 5W has done much to merit anything more than the cursory "5W is represented by..." mentions. I'd argue that the politics (whether you include the more contentious student activism) are essential to his notability and there's not much substance beyond PR-pushed puffery beyond it. Mosmof (talk) 04:31, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

I would also like Drmies to demonstrate how/why that section is "basically all puff", "really irrelevant stuff", "newspaper mentions are trivial", "sourcing weak", "person is notable for PR", how the political activism, about which paragraphs could be written based on reliable sources, constitute "a few minor actions". This multitude of dismissive reasons presented seems to be Drmies' personal opinion, cited without demonstrating that they are actually valid. Also, "if it's important to career, summarize in two sentences" - is this his résumé or LinkedIn profile? Why does it need to be important to his career?

Anyone claiming that he is notable for PR should be able to demonstrate how he is more notable for PR than politics, rather than stating it as an absolute, obvious fact - it is certainly not obvious to me. Also, what do the sources which mention his PR activities even say that could be used in any meaningful manner in the article? All I see is several adjectives (brash, aggressive, etc.), clients he has represented, his attitude towards his peers (dismissing Howard Rubenstein as "old and tired"), physical characteristics ("6 foot 2 with blunt features and close-cropped brown hair"). Has he done something novel or creative or remarkable in the PR field? He is the owner of a non-notable PR firm - his firm doesn't even have a Wikipedia article. His claim that his company is amongst the top 25 PR firms in the US is false - Wikipedia abetted him in propagating this lie for years till it was finally removed. His most in-depth PR profile is the New York Times one, and though it seems like he is a big deal because he was featured in the New York Times, it is in the "The City" section - essentially local New York City news. He is only in the news these days because he represents notable clients, from whom he doesn't inherit any notability, and those sources say nothing about Torossian the person. I don't see how a few profiles about his PR stuff (NYT, Forward, LifeStyles Magazine - all of which mention his politics anyway) trump several significant mentions about politics in leading national Israeli newspapers, so much so that his PR becomes all-important and his political activism is dismissed as "basically all puff", "really irrelevant stuff", "a few minor actions". FireflySixtySeven (talk) 06:11, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

I have been reading this and obviously see a long history of edits that seem to capture attention.

Let me add to this conversation that I think this article is about a person who no one knew until he owned a PR company. His early politics at Albany University barley registered any notice, as he was one in a million student activists promoting an agenda that he believes in. Big deal - there are so many of those around then, today and will always be. Torossian made news when he became the owner of a PR firm. He became known for his apparent "brash" ways and that is what the news is about. Now that he is notable people are trying to edit this article to make it that he is known for his advocacy, but in fact, he is not that interesting as an activist.

Since he started his firm, Torossian has been featured in several newspapers on his PR style and for the ability of a fairly young person to begin a firm and grow it in the amount of time he has. PR firms are a dime a dozen and many begin and fail within short terms of each other, and his still seems to be going well. If he is notable at all, it is for that PR firm and its growth. This Observer piece that plugs his style along with styles of others in his field (http://observer.com/2014/11/six-questions-for-ronn-torossian-nadine-johnson-peggy-siegal-michael-tavani/) shows that a journalist felt he was interesting enough to be in a roundup piece. There is nothing in this article worthy of wiki mention, other than top point out what he is noted for.

Here, (http://observer.com/2015/01/battling-jewish-titans-alan-dershowitz-and-ronn-torossian-kiss-and-make-up/) the same paper felt that his fight with Alan Desrhowitz made enough news to include him - which shows me he has a voice people may want to hear - or else, who cares what he says about the good professor?

I know that someone here said that his representation of this taxi owner is not news (http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/taxi-boss-deal-stop-bank-seizing-medallions-article-1.2228864) but Torossian seems to get a lot of mention on this topic. One of his people, I presume, tried to add the point of Torossian's part in navigating a peace deal with the NYC cops and the Mayor Bill de Blasio, and user:Huon deleted it saying it didn’t show he had any part of it. I would argue that it showed he was a significant part to be added into the piece as representing both of the parties. That may not prove he put it together, but it cuts to the point that he is known for his clients and his PR work -or else, why mention him and his relationship in the story? If we know anything about PR and news today, most of what we see is placed though the work of PR agents and rarely are these connectors mentioned in the stories; when the PR person is a well known name, like a Ken Sunshine, Edelman and the like, the news media adds their names to spice the story. If he was added, he may not be the person who made the deal happen, but he is known for PR - not politics.

In this piece, when Tom Brady was accused of knowingly being involved in the deflated football scandal, Torossian is commenting for NBC News on the issue (http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/hit-bradys-reputation-could-be-worse-league-discipline-n355011) - again, not worthy of a Wiki mention, but just to note that he was called on to comment because he is again, known for PR.

We cannot use Youtube as references, but we can be independently wise and look up other aspects here. Here, (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEmTC9Mxhjc) he is with CBS Insider on Bill Cosby. Local Fox News (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qNmKIHWjE0) on Alex Rodriguez, and on BBC news, an international news media, on that North Korea incident with the movie, The Interview (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=doLbUQcITlc)

Again, none can be used as Wiki references unless we find the actual clips from the media stations themselves (which the NBC piece seems to be), but it demonstrates the logic of him being known and called on for PR and not for his political views. I have looked, and I do not see many, if any at all, TV spots with him being asked about Israel or US Domestic politics. No one cares what he says on those issues.

His article on Wikipedia ought to be focused on what he became known for and that is PR and his firm. That aside, nothing else matters and he is not so interesting. There are tons of people commenting on Israel for the right and many are people who are known for policy and positions of significance to know or effect opinions. Torossian's Israel advocacy is not life changing. His PR skills are, however, called on by credible sources for comment and thought - even if they are over silly and rather inane issues like deflated footballs. That is what drives media today - sadly. Cada mori (talk) 13:55, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Torossian seems to get a lot of mention on this topic

This isn't exactly surprising for a PR exec who has a reputation for promoting himself (even to the point where he overshadows his clients) to the press. You're acting like the press discovered this plucky flack and they keep finding out he does amazing things, and forgetting what publicists do - promote the hell out of their interests to the media. Mosmof (talk) 14:19, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

@Cada mori: other editors here have given a clear statement about any relationship to the subject, commercial or otherwise, of this article. Particularly given the recent history of your own account, can I call upon you to make a statement about any possible conflict of interest here? --_nonsense ferret 14:27, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

user:Mosmof You are making the point. He is known for PR. Nothing more. Cada mori (talk) 14:47, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Nope. He's mentioned as a result of his PR effort. This is an important distinction here. He'd also be pretty anonymous if not for the mid-'00s push for publicity and his politics. Mosmof (talk) 14:56, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

I have no interest other than sheer curiosity on this matter. I came across this and the conversation is interesting enough here. To the point that I am not sure we disagree on; Mosmof said, “He's mentioned as a result of his PR effort… He'd also be pretty anonymous if not for the mid-'00s push for publicity and his politics.” I would say that his push for PR trumps his politics. His style in getting PR is what made him get news, not Israel or his right wing associations. He is known for his public relations style and even over aggressive behavior at it. Given that, all I suggest is that a Wikipedia article on him – if one is even merited, which is also debatable – it’s his public relations style, his efforts to garner that PR for him and his clients, and the ability to sustain a firm for over a decade already make him notable, not anything else.

Cada mori (talk) 19:47, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

• I'm sorry y'all, but I don't understand why I should read a bio of the subject on someone's website. We have a biographical article, and I read the lead, and it gives me no reason to believe that his politics are worth mentioning. Nor did that section give me any reason to believe it had any significance. I'm not on this guy's dick; I'm not on anyone's dick. In fact, I don't know this person at all, and I guess I don't care to know him. I also don't care who has a picture of whom in their office. But all of that is irrelevant. We should not have a separate section on someone's political opinions unless that stuff is relevant to that person's reason for being in here in the first place, and if it's relevant, it should be incorporated properly.

  Now, if anyone wishes to argue that the vanity publication

[Lifestyles Magazine or the U of Albany campus paper are so important that some aspect of some person being mentioned in it should be included in our article, I'd love to see it. And that Birthright Israel stuff (this is all just incredibly exciting, and I am so happy we're taking the long view here about encyclopedic importance and stuff), if it's really important, it shouldn't be under his "politics" but under his work. Have a nice day, Drmies (talk) 17:29, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

• Jytdog, his editorials etc. are of no importance until they are noted to be of importance. Drmies (talk) 17:32, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

• @Drmies: "We should not have a separate section on someone's political opinions unless that stuff is relevant to that person's reason for being in here in the first place" is an argument that has been put forward a lot here. I think it is a spurious argument. Of course if an ordinary person gets a speeding ticket that fact even if verifiable would not be encyclopedic. If a president gets a speeding ticket and it is reported in the press, that probably is encyclopedic. Getting a ticket isn't what they are known for, isn't part of the reason for being here in the first place, but that isn't a reason to exclude. We should measure what is or isn't included based on weighing up fairly what reliable sources report, not on whether it meets with our personal opinions of why a subject was in the encyclopedia. --_nonsense ferret 18:09, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

I have trouble believing the fact that someone got a speeding ticket (whoever they are) could be encyclopedic, and a lot of the stuff that was in that section was just as minor. Just because news organizations cover something, doesn't mean that an encyclopedia should. ― Padenton|✉   18:19, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

That does not appear to be based on consensus as there are many examples of such coverage of relatively trivial incidents - see for example when a government minister bumped someone's car in a parking manoeuvre Ed_Balls#Fined_for_failing_to_stop_after_a_car_.22crash.22 --_nonsense ferret 18:32, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. And the existence of that subsection in that article has been heavily disputed since it was added, so it isn't really evidence of previous consensus. ― Padenton|✉   19:27, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

You said you had trouble believing, there are plenty of examples. So maybe if you see you will believe, and understand that your analysis is wrong. --_nonsense ferret 19:42, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Examples of BLP violations existing is not what I said I had trouble believing. I have trouble believing it could be encyclopedic, not that some editor has put non-encyclopedic facts in other articles. ― Padenton|✉   19:45, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

If you are so very convinced then put your money where your mouth is, lets see you delete the section from the Ed Balls article and demonstrate where consensus stands. --_nonsense ferret 21:25, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Because I don't need to? Why would I waste my time on a dispute in that article just to use the result of a barely comparable dispute as an argument here? You really think it's logical that I waste my time on a separate dispute? No thanks. You're welcome to do so. ― Padenton|✉   21:59, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Ah, the old "you just don't like it". "Our personal opinions on..." is hot air. This subject is in the encyclopedia apparently because he is notable as a PR person. You quote selectively, and seem to have missed my edit summary as well. If material is well-verified and relevant, yes, it can be in our article--but there is no reason to have that as a separate section, documenting every fart that a journalist (or other publication) smelled. Drmies (talk) 18:25, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

I agree that the size and the detailedness of the section were WP:UNDUE, but again, I'll say that as purely a PR person, Torossian isn't that notable. It's more his polarizing personality, and a big part (if not the entirety) of it is his politics. And my understanding is that, at least when his company was founded, his political client accounted for much of the billings. I think a couple of sentences, whether or not we mention the student activism, is required. Mosmof (talk) 18:29, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

I think it is important to be clear on what argument is being made, and relevance "to that person's reason for being in here" is a subjective and invalid argument. If you wish to argue that there is insufficient weight of coverage, that's a different argument entirely. --_nonsense ferret 18:32, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi Drmies thanks for replying! I am puzzled. There are a few sources about the guy. As you have gathered he is .... brash, and most of the sources about him per se, are brash-back-at-ya. Lifestyles Magazine (and i saw that you found their website) does lots of profiles, and generally sympathetic ones. Torossian clearly cooperated in it. So seems very useful on multiple levels. Nobody can complain it is a "hit job" (like people can complain about the Gawker profile) and it is one of the only places where we get a real 10,000 foot level view of the guy. And the piece makes it very clear that Revisionist Zionism is what makes him tick.

Other profiles do it too -

• see page 3 of the NY Times piece on him from 2005
• this piece from The Forward quotes one of his clients talking about that part of his life ("The political figures he works with tend to stand to the far right of the political spectrum — expressing sentiments consistent with Torossian’s own days as a rough-necked agitator in Israel, when he was escorting bulldozers into East Jerusalem to help force out Palestinian residents. “You were one of those crazy militant guys, weren’t you?” Jameel Spencer, P. Diddy’s business partner and confidant, once asked him. Torossian just smirked at the fond memories");
• even this blurb mentions his work for Likud (the contemporary heir of Ze'ev Jabotinsky's political movement, Revisionist Zionism.
• all this makes sense of his huge output of political advocacy in all those columns i linked to above.

It is true that, to a great extent, he keeps his PR work separate from his politics (e.g. his eponymous website is all about PR and doesn't mention Jabotinsky). But that is not true the other way -- all his columnist profiles mention his PR work, and three of the 4 mention The Ronn Torossian Foundation.. which in turn, runs http://www.zeevjabotinsky.com. Even today, his politics are strong and clear.

You know I am not a crazy person and that I work carefully here in WP. In my view, this article is not complete without a discussion of his politics and we have good sources for them. Maybe you think his college days got too much WEIGHT. Fine. But expunging it all is not right either. Jytdog (talk) 00:42, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

• Jytdog, I know you're not crazy, and you know I'm not an expunger. There may well be a valid place for that information, but (again) as long as it's not all that important (according to secondary sources and our article) there simply shouldn't be a separate section. All this talk here by a half a dozen people is great, but someone should simply rewrite the article and the lead, incorporating that material into his biography/career. He's not notable because of his biography, but because of his career. The problem is of course that a separate section all too easily becomes a dumping ground for, well, farts... Once you create the validity of his politics by writing them into the article's main text and the lead, you give yourself a much better opportunity for this argument. Drmies (talk) 09:00, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

At the expense of commenting where I am going to be told that my opinions are not authorized, I must tell you that it is amazing to me that there is such a melee over his life and career. Ronn Torossian is a relatively young entrepreneur who, against many odds, began a PR firm and worked very hard to make it successful. His story and his notability stem from his public relations work. What inspired Torossian has a place, but to be so weighted on these issues seems overkill, and even to serve as a prejudicial reading of his life.

His college days were a long time ago and never amounted to mention in any encyclopedia before Wikipedia came about. He made a name in PR and that is when he was noticed and, for good and bad, got news for the way he and his firm fought for clients. That is what the news was about, that is what the Gawker piece was about and many others too. It was not about his personal beliefs.

Today, 5W has a large beauty practice, but what makes news is a 2014 release advising that 5W is opening an Israel practice. The editors want to include issues of past work protesting for Israel, but that he worked for Likud and the first prime minister Netanyahu in the late 1990s is not considered as important as groups he joined in Albany while in college.

Torossian built many practices at 5W, healthcare, investor relations, corporate, consumer, beverage, entertainment and more, and those are huge, but Israel is all some want to portray here. It does not make sense. If he is known for PR, be balanced and put his PR there.

t is weighted so heavily now on a single concentration.

Anyone who wants to argue that my commentary is not warranted or threaten to block me for using the talk page only serves to sharpen the case that there is no answer other that biased editing for a purpose other than Wikipedia ground rules.

Treat this page as any article and consider what he is known for and why, and what makes a valid Wikipedia article. I would welcome a true review of this piece and Torossian’s accomplishments and notability.

Juda S. Engelmayer (talk) 12:40, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

I certainly am no Duck, nor am I a Parrot, but there are facts here that just are not getting though. As I have said often enough, I am not sure this subject merits a Wikipedia article. Now that it is here, let it be known that my opinion is that he is notable for public relations. His Israel writing is nice and all, but no one cares. It does not move policy, does not gather supporters and certainly does not change the course of events in the Middle East. His PR, however, attracts attention. If only to call attention to the fact that he has high profile clients (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/18/nyregion/afte... and http://pagesix.com/2015/01/25/former-apple-ceo-...), he gets reporters to ask him about high profile celebrities (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/21/rihann...) and on occasion gets his own work into real newspapers like the Washington Post (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/politics/blog-...). Every now and then he even gets a profile in a magazine like Entrepreneur (http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/207530).

I did this research using lexis nexis and highbeam and anyone of you can too. I am not suggesting that any of these pieces I mention are fodder for a Wikipedia article, but to point out that he is known for PR whether anyone here would admit it or not. He gets called and asked for PR questions and gets quoted on PR issues – not Israel and the right wing agenda. As far as Wikipedia credibility goes, what makes a proper BLP is the facts of why he is interesting for an article and sorry, that is not because he is a right winger. It is not because of his youth movements, and while being a thorn in the sides of the New Israel Fund, his articles have had little impact beyond preaching to the converted. So no, those are fun to read and we can argue as to the justification of the cause, but it really impacts very few people. He is quoted by NBC, Fox and others for football, basketball and Lindsey Lohan – no one is asking his opinion on Netanyahu’s congress speech or the narrow margin of Knesset lead he may have. No media thinks of Torossian for those questions. This article should have his PR story and the way he grew to where he is. Mention of the Israel material ought not be the focus.

This is without even talking about the veracity of using Gawker as a source for quality solid credentials. Whoever suggested that Gawker has grown out of its gossip phase has got to be kidding. Respectfully, I don’t take anyone here for fools, so please don’t do the same to me or any of us. Gawker is as its name suggests, To stare or gape stupidly –to annoy us all by rubbernecking. It is not a news site from which to claim validity. Cada mori (talk) 20:20, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Added material

A new line was added recently, suggesting, "Torossian and his company promoted news stories about Pamela Geller and American Freedom Defense Initiative but has claimed that neither is not a client." It references an article on the site JewSchool, a blog at best, that talks about Torossian's firm sending a single press release on behalf of AFDI and Pamela Geller. The sentence added is to suggest that it is indeed noteworthy news that 5WPR sent a single release and denied they were working together. I would think that there would be more material tying the two together if there was a financial relationship, and I would also think that this really is not noteworthy information at all. If anything is certain, Geller and Torossian are both ardent supporters of Israel and the more right leaning side of politics there. That they both have been on campaigns aimed at the same group (New Israel Fund) is not curious at all, but expected. If anything is noteworthy here it is the recent challenge between NIF and Torossian, as seen here. Where Torossian, and two others wrote a piece in the Jerusalem Post about NIF, The Jerusalem Post then published a piece by NIF's Naomi Pass, leveling accusations against Torossian, to which the Jerusalem Post then took down the article by Paiss and issued an apology to Torossian, citing "factual errors, as well as for the hurtful tone."

To leave just a single sentence about AFDI does not tell the story, nor is it credible alone. Torossian, as other high profile executives often do, engages in advocacy. One press release for AFDI could be joining of the minds on an issue of concern to both, not necessarily a client-relationship. The additional coverage that has been garnered seems to talk about Torossian's ideologies, and the Jerusalem Post's rescinding of the article by Paiss, may indicate that NIF could not back up its charges, while Torossian's advocacy forced Paiss to recognize the issue that Torossian has been pushing; while saying NIF opposes BDS, Paiss admits, "At the same time, the NIF will not deny funding to organizations that call for a boycott of settlement products, assuming they meet our other rigorous funding criteria." Having it both ways.

It should be removed, or edited correctly. Lebraunjames (talk) 16:51, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

This piece is not cited with any authoritative information. User:helenasky 1:36, 22 September 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Helenasky (talk • contribs)

Here's [another source] for the relationship, more notable than the source used initially. There are also other sources out there too, for instance: 1, 2, 3.

Use of some of these sources would be inappropriate as Original Research or on other grounds. But certainly a news article in the The Jewish Journal of Greater Los Angeles - the "largest Jewish weekly outside of New York City" - passes muster on notability and reliable source grounds. I list the other sources here because of the concern raised by LebraunJames that "one press release" is not enough. Note that Geller herself speaks of the impact of what she, Torossian, and another party accomplished.

I agree that there is insufficient evidence of a client relationship. This should be worded carefully to avoid stating that. By my read, the language used didn't say that and even explicitly mentioned that there was no client relationship. Any suggestions on a better formulation?

Finally, I want to say that this is an article about Ronn Torossian, not about his company. Whether or not there is a professional relationship doesn't seem relevant to this article in the same way that it might be if the subject were 5WPR. I share LebraunJames's view that the nature of the collaboration is probably shared ideology. Has anybody seen any RS sources that show that? --Perplexed566 (talk) 14:36, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Dear Perplexed566, thank you for the comments. I tend to agree that the page is about him and not his firm, so the relationship with Pamela Geller is not an important feature. We have no way of knowing if they are friends personally, and no way of knowing of they have business relations. What is more evident with additional time between the edits here is that the conversation is not about AFDI alone, because Parties on the right and left in Israel have been also asking questions of the New Israel Fund., and left wingers such as Lapid have issue with groups funded by the NIF,

I am not sure the conversation as a whole has merit for this article, as it is and has been largely, an issue for Jewish and Israel media and has not risen beyond that. If one were to argue that it should be here, the Pamela Geller connection, which is why I believe we are even engaged in the conversation at all, is rather insignificant for this. Thank you again. Lebraunjames (talk) 16:58, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Just to clarify: The denial by Torossian that he represented Pamela Geller is a complete red herring. He was denying an allegation that no one ever made; none of the articles on the anti-NIF campaign ever contended that Torossian or his firm represented Geller. What the articles do say is that Torossian and Geller joined forces to attack the NIF: they appeared together on speakers' platforms, and Torossian's op-ed articles attacking American Jewish leaders who supported NIF appeared within days of Geller's bus ads attacking those same leaders.

Also, it is incorrect to identify Yair Lapid as a left-winger. He considers himself to be a middle of the road politician, who assiduously avoids identifying with the positions of most left-wing parties, and other politicians consider him more right than left. --Ravpapa (talk) 05:58, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

I believe that the Jewish Journal article offers the notability and reliable source standards required to insert the bit about the connection with Pamela Geller. I don't see any sources that shed light on whether it's a client relationship or an ideological collaboration. (I suppose it could be both?) Therefore the article should not say what the basis of the relationship is. 208.58.5.97 (talk) 03:01, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Ok. I'm taking a stab at language that lays out the facts clearly as reported by Reliable Sources, and keeping in mind the comments above. I welcome any suggestions for improving it:

A spokesperson for the New Israel Fund wrote that Torossian has "teamed up" with Pamela Geller and an article in the Jewish Journal of Greater Los Angeles found evidence that he "works in some capacity with Geller." Torossian denies that there is any professional relationship between the two. PPX (talk) 15:27, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

References