Talk:Tim Ferriss/Archives/2018

Controversy and Claims

Ferriss makes several unsubstantiated claims in his book:

• That he is a National Chinese Kickboxing champion.
• That he has been a "Cage fighter in Japan, vanquisher of four world champions (MMA These fights are not sufficiently substantiated by Ferriss [1] and appear in no MMA databases.
• That he is "Advisor to more than 30 world record holders in professional and Olympic sports" (not substantiated).
• That he has been a "Cage fighter in Japan, vanquisher of four world champions (MMA)" and a "National Chinese kickboxing champion" (not substantiated).
• That he created a chain of gyms in China before being forced to close them down by local gangsters (not substantiated--Ferriss refuses to name the gym or its location).
  • in the book is nothing about China —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.19.156.148 (talk) 11:20, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
• That he was an actor on a hit TV series in mainland China and Hong Kong (not substantiated--no trace of video nor listings and Ferriss will not name the show).
• In an article on his blog, Ferriss claims to have gained 34lbs of muscle in 4 weeks, with a total gym time of just 4 hours (not substantiated)

Ferriss' book received numerous five star reviews on the day of its release, prompting the blog author to suspect inappropriate gaming of Amazon.com's rating system. The blog author further speculates that Ferriss has perpetuated a Confidence trick in the mode of Aleksey Vayner.

Respected TED member Max Hodges noted that Tim Ferriss's claims regarding his swimming ability are completely fraudulent. TED Members thanked Max for pointing out Tim's fraud "Ah...you're a genius. Now I feel disillusioned. Thanks Max." and many lamented that TED is ruining its credibility.

Please provide reliable, verifiable sources for this information. Without such references, it cannot be included in the article. Thank you. --Alan (talk) 16:46, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you Alan.

The onus is on Tim to back his words up with reliable, verifiable sources. Do you not agree? Or can one just make a claim and the moment it gets out on the internet, it is just the truth.

I am willing to take this to the top of Wikipedia, Crown Publishing, and Random House publishing, in which case I will request your full name and association with Wikipedia/Tim/Crown.

I am currently penning a paper on Wikipedia and its relationship with corporate entities and interests, and I would like to include your work, actions, and opinions in my paper.

Alan--are you of the opinion that Tim Ferriss can say anything he wants and never provide any verifiable resources, and the world must accept it as the gospel truth as Tim is backed by major corporate interests. Alan--in your opinion, is this how Wikipedia works?

The references and verifiable sources for Tim's outlandish claims are Tim's blogs and books. Are these not good enough references? I am not sure what more you want. Indeed, the outlandish claims have no other sources but for Tim's work, and that is what makes them outlandish. Because Tim is a #1 bestselling author in the NYT and WSJ, this is major news. He and his publishers are making millions on unverifiable claims, and this is news and of great interest to the general public. The claims are Tim's and they are set down in stone via the printed word, authored by Tim, to be found in his book and blog. What more would you like to see?

Would you agree, Alan, that the spirit of Wikipedia is to speak the Truth? Or is it to be used as a branch of Random House and financial interests.

Thank you for your time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.0.157.163 (talk) 17:03, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Alan--please let me know what you would like to see from me in the way of sources and I will be more than happy to provide you with it, inlcuding your own preferred format.

Thanks for your time Alan.

Best, :)

The material currently in the article appears to be properly sourced and referenced. It is therefore upon you to provide proper sources and references for any material you intend to add to the article, in accordance with Wikipedia's standards. See WP:V, WP:OR, WP:SYN, WP:SOURCES.

Your efforts are furthering the appearance of a conflict of interest you may have with the topic of the article (see WP:COI for restrictions on editors).

Finally, your statements above regarding your willingness to "take this to the top" are a violation of WP:LEGAL.

As to including my statements in a published paper, I have no problems with such, so long as the paper is released in accordance with the Creative Commons License model (see Creative Commons license for specific rights granted).

--Alan (talk) 17:19, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Alan, your words "Your efforts are furthering the appearance of a conflict of interest you may have with the topic of the article" are an unjustified POV and have no place on wikipedia. Please tone down the hate speech and ad hominem attacks. Thanks in advance.

Alan--America is a free country and one is allowed to take things to the top of any organization. Are you suggesting that America is no longer a free country? Who rules us now?

Alan--are you requesting that I provide exact page numbers for Tim's outrageous claims? Is that all that is missing?

Please let me know, and I will gladly serve your desires.

I am still puzzled as to the emotional hatred your words are seething with.

I am more than happy to fulfill all your wishes and desires.

So would you like the exact page numbers? I can get this easily for you.

Thanks for your time Alan. I enjoy working on you in resolving this issue, and I do appreciate you toning down the stridency of your phraseology. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.0.157.163 (talk) 17:28, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

P.S. Alan--please stop trying to get be banned from wikipedia for the simple act of adding truth to wikipedia pages, by labeling the simple act of speaking truth as "vandalism." Indeed, truth is treason in an empire of lies, but Alan, Wikipedia is not an empire of lies, and thus truth cannot be deemed vandalism. Thanks again for your time, and thanks again for claimng down a bit and refraining from trying to get be banned for your own private and perhaps corporate reasons. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.0.157.163 (talk) 17:31, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

I believe I am being extremely civil and professional. But I am also pointing out specific areas of Wikipedia standards that both your proposed edit and your commentary in this article's talk page, as well as that for The 4-Hour Workweek, have violated.

It's clear that any position contrary to your own is untenable to you, and you have yet to seek consensus regarding the inclusion of your material. I therefore take the latter into my own hands, as follows below. --Alan (talk) 17:39, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

References

Tango Spin Champion

I looked into the "Tango Spin Champion" gibe in this article and found this, which argues that having such a championship in the first place is daft. So I'm removing "tango spin" from Ferriss's self-promotion article. Respectfully Chisme (talk) 22:27, 1 October 2018 (UTC)