Talk:Stanley Fischer

US Citizenship

• I'm sorry to say that the question of his US citizenship hasn't really been cleared. I changed my original edit after I read the report in the BBC site (which now apears in the external links), but earlier today I came upon this report, in Israeli newspaper Haaretz, which says:

"In order to take up the post, Fischer, 61, must renounce his U.S. citizenship and become a citizen of Israel. Government regulations forbid holders of high office from retaining dual citizenship."

• So, it is indeed unclear... What should we do? --Lidless Eye 23:36, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)

Very poor article. Nothing about Fischer's economic views, or indeed about the debate around his appointment as governor of the Bank of Israel (essentially a foreigner with minimal knowledge of the official language). I am not an economist and cannot do this myself. --BorisG 16:59, 3 December 2005 (UTC) what about zambian citizenship?

Very little info

I think this article should be a stub. There is very little info on Stanley's views on economics plus his work at the IMF or any major works published. He was at the helm of the IMF during the Asian crisis and came under alot of criticism for how the IMF handled most of this economies, surely someone should expound on some of this. --Kendirangu 06:09, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Hebrew Speaking

Fischer is a fluent Hebrew speaker.[citation needed]. Why "citation needed"? Everyone in Israel hears him over the radio and TV giving lectures etc,,,in Hebrew.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.172.155.8 (talk) 04:37, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

He is a speaker of Hebrew but not fluent. And the provided source (flix) is not a reliable one. Marokwitz (talk) 08:59, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Bad External Links

the Bank of Israel link is bad and should be http://www.boi.org.il/en/AboutTheBank/OfficeHolders/Pages/StanleyFischer.aspx and the Forbes link is to the wrong Fischer, and should be removed.208.48.207.250 (talk) 18:30, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Problematic removal of nomination info

At this diff information was removed sourced by BusinessWeek, The Hill and The American Conservative. It is customary in Wikipedia to put in information on issues in the nominating process which may or may not include criticism. See the couple paragraphs in Rahm_Emanuel#White_House_Chief_of_Staff and the long section in Chuck_Hagel#Nomination_process. If it's recent, one puts a {{current person|date=January 2014}} tag to get more input and even beefing up of the article. I've put on the tag.

Other relevant articles include these at: ABC News, Washington Post, The Jewish Week, Haaretz, Jersualem Post, USA Today, Religion Dispatches.

The article has too much unref'd material, many such refs available from sources above. Some of it probably should be removed soon that looks like questionable or possibly exaggerated/extraordinary claims. It always can be replaced once ref'd.

Content wise, the fact that Fischer is a dual citizen of another nation who recently was head of that other nations' banking system surely is unprecedented in US History and therefore Notable. Some may not like that there is discussion of this fact, but that is no reason to remove it, something which has long been covered by the Israel-Palestine Arbitration. In fact I'm adding that {{Arab-Israeli Arbitration Enforcement}} tag since it's broadly construed and often put on Bios where this becomes an issue as it has now - especially ones that are under Israel wikiprojects (and now US wikiproject I've added). Also adding the {{POV-section|date=January 2014}} tag. Others' thoughts? Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 18:10, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

On Wikipedia, notability is a test used by editors to decide whether a topic can have its own article. SPECIFICO talk 18:36, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Where has someone said something needs it's own article? Only paragraphs and sections mentioned. Please read more carefully. Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 19:07, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

You are misrepresenting my message above. I am clearly and explicitly referring to your surprising misuse of the Wikipedia Notability policy link above. If after all your years here you do not understand WP policy, you should not be assuming such contentious editing postures. Please read the link and make policy-based arguments for your view. SPECIFICO talk 21:25, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

You do have to read further than the first sentence of a policy. Further down it reads: This is not a guarantee that a topic will necessarily be handled as a separate, stand-alone page. Editors may use their discretion to merge or group two or more related topics into a single article. These notability guidelines only outline how suitable a topic is for its own article or list. They do not limit the content of an article or list. So we can discuss whether a topic within an article is notable for inclusion, whether it is WP:Undue, against WP:BLP, etc etc.

But this is a side issue since you have not discussed your reasons for removing the information. Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 21:51, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

@SPECIFICO: Still waiting for an explanation of removal of material. Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 19:08, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Your pings are not working, I have no idea why. You seem to be confusing notability, which is a standard for creating/keeping a WP article and the noteworthiness, or significance of facts or events which warrant inclusion in a WP aritcle. As I stated, the content is undue. I suggest you await the views of other editors here. So far, nobody has voiced agreement with your concern, and your tag has been removed. Thanks. SPECIFICO talk 01:15, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Well, I'll leave the extra space, but I only do it when about to do a RSN or 2rd opinion or whatever. Do not remove tag since whole purpose of 3rd opinion or RfC is to get opinions where they don't come in from the talk page itself. Tomorrow will add a few more relevant refs on the issue. Plus his hearing should produce one. Looking for hearing date, found a prophetic link. Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 01:23, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Your ping function may have been disabled. I did not remove your tag. @Iselilja: removed your tag. You may find RS, but that doesn't address the reasons I stated in my edit summary when I removed the undue content. Thanks. SPECIFICO talk 01:54, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

As I explained discussions regarding nominations are common in these articles. Sounds like WP:IDONTLIKEIT to me. Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 04:18, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

@Carolmooredc: Your disparaging comment about my judgment, "Sounds like WP:IDONTLIKEIT to me", is not a constructive response. My view is that the text was inappropriate and I cited two WP principles which support my view. If you disagree, please make a specific policy-based argument for your view. Thanks. SPECIFICO talk 04:51, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

I have turned off the notification function (which bothered me), so I just saw this now. I removed the "current event" tag because as mentioned in my edit summary, I don't believe it's meant for articles like this. I was lectured a bit about the use of the current tag at another talk page recently. Regards, Iselilja (talk) 05:29, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

SPECIFICO: Sorry if I forget the wikilink - Wikipedia:IDONTLIKEIT#I_don.27t_like_it - so you could read just a sliver of all the guises under which I don't like it hide themselves. If you think bringing that link up is problematic, ask that the section be deleted at the essay or elsewhere. In the interim, given that this kind of information is so frequently used in nomination or position sections on BLPs, and given your upset reactions to my criticizing a foreign nation on and (as you researched) off-wiki, I have to assume you are incensed by the fact that Americans are discussing and even criticizing the issue of Fischer's dual citizenship, and his last job for a foreign nation, and do not want that info on Wikipedia.

Iselija: I was talking about the Neutrality tag, not the one you removed. It was just closest thing I could find to my point at the time and your argument made sense. Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 22:09, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

On citizenship

Fischer became american citizen in 1976 and israelian citizen in 2005. What about before 1976? Was he a citizen of Northern Rhodesia? Was he a british citizen (Northern Rhodesia was then a British Protectorate)? Was he stateless?--Ὕβϱις (talk) 10:01, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Stanley Fischer. 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/20110828210925/http://www.bilderbergmeetings.org/participants_2011.html to http://www.bilderbergmeetings.org/participants_2011.html

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) 04:45, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Stanley Fischer. 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/20130512135045/http://www.strategicdialogue.org/events/items/humanitas-economic-fischer to http://www.strategicdialogue.org/events/items/humanitas-economic-fischer

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) 22:58, 24 December 2017 (UTC)