| This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please change:
"Later in 1995, Musk, his brother Kimbal, and Greg Kouri borrowed funds from Musk's father and founded Zip2."
To:
"Later in 1995, Musk, his brother Kimbal, and Greg Kouri founded Zip2."
The former is not supported and is in fact contradicted by the article in the citation and is misleading (leading the reader to believe that the loan was required for the founding of Zip2 when it was actually incidental). The Zip2 article states that Errol did indeed contribute money towards Zip2, but only 10% of a funding round in the form of a loan of $28k.
Alternatively:
"Later in 1995, Musk, his brother Kimbal, and Greg Kouri founded Zip2, helped in small part by a loan of $28,000 from Musk's father." 82.5.42.19 (talk) 18:05, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
- How is 28,000 USD incidental for micro-start up in 1995? QRep2020 (talk) 22:58, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
- Rather than nitpicking my wording, consider whether the image formed by "Musk borrowed funds from his father and founded Zip2" is accurate given the citations. And consider whether the alternative wordings form a more accurate impression for the reader. 82.5.42.19 (talk) 23:05, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
- The Zip2 article states clearly the substance of the matter, using sources. The middle of the three choices above would be the accurate characterization. Errol Musk's contribution was, as characterized by Elon, "much later", thus not a founding loan. The existing text is, quite simply, incorrect. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 23:16, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
- I see two sources on the Zip2 article that essentially quote or are quotations from Musk. These are autobiographical primary sources, yes, but statement is clearly controversial and so simply blanking out any mention of Errol's contribution flies in the face of that fact.
- I could see the third choice working with the "in small part" removed, or perhaps instead we can add something to what is already present about how Musk later denied this specific account and thus follow the example in WP:PRIMARYCARE#Primary sources should be used carefully. But the point about borrowing money from Errol for Zip2 warrants inclusion as by all the sources. QRep2020 (talk) 00:06, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- I can find only two sources that suggest that Errol Musk was a founding investor in zip2 - - Rolling Stone (not the most reliable source) and Ashlee Vance's biography, also not specifically reliable. I can find sources that specifically mention three founders. A later investment in an angel round by his father - if it can be verified - doesn't qualify as "borrowed funds from Musk's father and founded Zip2." If there are reliable sources that actually show that his father was a founding investor, that's viable in a BLP. Otherwise, it should be struck as the way it's written now it does not have reliable sources to support the wording. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 01:11, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Like I said, I am fine with changing the text to the modified third option, but not the second one. I do not see a outlined defense of the second option in your latest comments, so does that mean you are agreeable to the modified third option?
- Also, Vance's book is cited more than a dozen times in this article alone. I am not sure what you mean by "specifically reliable" but clearly it is reliable enough for an article that has passed the Good Article criteria. QRep2020 (talk) 02:26, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Is (Elon) Musk quoted in the book saying that Errol loaned $28k to help start Zip2? Or, did Vance interview Errol and he said that he loaned Elon $28k to start the company? Whichever the case, Elon has denied and disputed the characterization. I'm not invested in the matter enough to buy Vance's book. Crunchbase makes no mention of such an investment by the elder Musk. I can find no other sources that formally corroborate the claim. Other sources make no mention of this alleged investment. If you or someone else has access to the book, I'd be interested to know the circumstances and how it is characterized in it. I think it is necessary, if this claim of the $28k investment is to stand, then Musk's denial, and clarification of what it was (a much later angel investment, well after founding), needs to be included. It's perfectly reasonable to have the subject of the BLP quoted in regards to the matter, unless we're to imply that he's lying about it. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 03:04, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Regarding my term 'specifically reliable', I have not read the entire article, nor am I interested in doing so. Is Vance cited for any controversial content, that is disputed by Musk or others? That was my qualification. In this case, the claim is disputed, so it may not specifically be reliable in this circumstance. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 04:12, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
So, to try to move forward. The article apparently some time back previously said this (at least according to this post on ycombinator, but it's obviously not reliable - just using it as a starting point - ):
"In Ashlee Vance's biography of Elon Musk, it is claimed that the Musks' father, Errol Musk, provided them with US$28,000 during this time, but Elon Musk later denied this. He later clarified that his dad provided around 10% of US$200,000 as part of a later funding round."
That is problematic as well, so perhaps something more along this line:
Later in 1995, Musk, his brother Kimbal, and Greg Kouri founded Zip2. In Vance's biography of Musk, he claims that the Musks' father, Errol Musk, provided them with US$28,000 during this time. Elon Musk later denied this, and further claimed that his father provided around 10% of US$200,000 as part of a later funding round.
In that older revision, it cites chapter 4 of the book. I think it could even be trimmed further to end at 'denied this'. The claim is disputed by and within the sources, this characterizes the dispute neutrally for a BLP in my opinion. It would be great if someone with access to the book could provide the details as presented there. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 04:26, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Update. Thanks to Firefangledfeathers for the pointer to OpenLibrary. Here is the precise text from the book: Errol Musk gave his sons $28,000 to get them through this period, but they were more or less broke after getting the office space, licensing software, and buying some equipment. For the first three months of Zip2's life, Musk and his brother lived at the office.
I've contacted Ashlee Vance through his website to get greater clarity on this, pointing him to this thread, but have no expectation of a response, here or otherwise. The only problem is we don't know the 'provenance' of the statements. From Elon? From Errol? No idea (Errol isn't listed in the book as someone Vance contacted though). With the information as it stands currently, the dispute as to Errol's contribution needs to be noted in the article text. Leaving it only as 'Errol did give money at the start' is misleading, as much as leaving it only in Elon's words that 'Errol did not give money at the start'. We simply present both pieces of information in order to remain neutral. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 22:11, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- I marked this request as "answered" as discussion is obviously needed before the request can be implemented. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 03:17, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Anyone with a free account at OpenLibrary can borrow the book: https://openlibrary.org/books/OL25755973M/Elon_Musk. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 14:01, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks kindly for that tip, Firefangledfeathers. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 22:11, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- This talk of provenance is a bit much. The point is that Vance wrote such and such in a published, widely received book and that is sufficient for our purposes.
- The controversy does not need to be featured, it can be. Furthermore, the details of the controversy are best suited for discussion at Zip2, as it does currently.
- I am leaning towards the modified third option I presented earlier at the moment. QRep2020 (talk) 23:38, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Would this work for you?
In 1995, Musk, his brother Kimbal, and Greg Kouri founded Zip2, helped with $28,000 from Musk's father, though Elon Musk disputes this claim of his father's assistance.
This limits discussion of the details of the dispute, as suggested. It's worth noting that the book says nothing of a loan, so if the book is canonical, then this article currently mischaracterizes what ostensibly took place. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 00:02, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
- That suggests Musk said Errol did not give the money, which is not in question. What is is when the assistance came. QRep2020 (talk) 02:38, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
- The few reliable sources out there say that Elon and Kimbal, or Elon, Kimbal, and Kouri founded Zip2, with no mention of Errol. Whether or when Errol contributed cash or not, he was not a founder. . Only Vance's book has put forth the $28k claim, which Elon disputes. At minimum, the merging of 'founded' and 'help from Errol' is disputed by both the weight of reliable sources, and Elon's statements. So,
In 1995, Musk, his brother Kimbal, and Greg Kouri founded Zip2. Errol Musk invested in Zip2, but when this occur is disputed. [insert reliable sources]
- We can't say that Errol helped found Zip2 - which the current and proposed construct #3 imply - when that claim is disputed. By disconnecting the founding from mention of Errol's contribution, we avoid synthesis, and we avoid the conflicting wording of whether Errol gave or loaned money to found the company. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 22:55, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
- You should really wait for a consensus to be drawn before attempting another bold edit, even if it is an agreeable one ultimately. QRep2020 (talk) 22:45, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
- I've never previously made any WP:BRD edits to this article. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 22:55, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
- Apologies, a bold edit. QRep2020 (talk) 19:18, 2 October 2022 (UTC)