![]() | Bob Parsons was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||
|
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Bob Parsons article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
http://www.radiogodaddy.com/ Bob Parsons' radio show
I went ahead and merged the text into this article - under Radio Show - unfortunately the redirect won't link directly to a section - but it is good enough I think. I would move the section up a bit - but not sure where (except above the guatanamo thing) since the rest are basically in chronological order. So I left it last Trödel 06:10, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
The issue I have is:
1. You don't need to spell out what he said in his blog. It's sourced, people can read it for themselves. Wikipedia is not a soapbox.
2. I don't see why both issues can't be under a general controversies section.
Ardenn 01:01, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
The neutral point of view is a means of dealing with conflicting views. The policy requires that, where there are or have been conflicting views, these should be presented fairly, but not asserted. All significant points of view are presented, not just the most popular one. It should not be asserted that the most popular view or some sort of intermediate view among the different views is the correct one. Readers are left to form their own opinions. - WP:NPOV
Ardenn 05:14, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
I came here to see if the Bob Parsons running godaddy was the same one that started Parson's technology - and like nearly always - wikipedia had the answer; however, the state of this article is utterly deplorable. One blog comment is about half the words of the article. This is really a shame for an internet pioneer who has successfully started 2 companies, though I wish he wouldn't have sold out to Intuit - I still miss my Money Counts software as I struggle through Quicken's do it our way and we'll make budgetting as complicated as possible - but who can blame him.
Anyway I know nothing about him other than I loved the software - but I do know this article needs serious work. Trödel 13:17, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
There's not more than skeletal information on Parsons Technology, which perhaps should be a separate article. It mentions only one product, and leaves out major ones such as their tax software. It mentions the Intuit buyout, but does not mention that Intuit spit it back out a few years later. My recollection was that Intuit killed off the tax software and Parsons Technology reemerged with its other software intact, Bob Parsons was contractually prohibited from selling tax software for a period of time (a year?) and that he tried to resurrect that business on the Web after that period expired. I have no idea what happened to the company, but I see that the Bible software is out there on QuickVerse.com with an oblique reference, which is "The Parsons Church Division." Is that affiliated with Bob Parsons, was it merely named after him, or was it a coincidental reference to those with the clerical title? Why was Parsons involved in Bible software? If religion is a big part of his life, it's relevant if it plays a significant role in his business model. Hagrinas ( talk) 22:11, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
have been made. References below Trödel 06:53, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
Type | Title | Link | In Article |
---|---|---|---|
Magazine | Worthwhile (WSJ) | GoDaddy's Remarkable Daddy | Yes |
Magazine | DNJournal | Underachiever to Overlord: Go Daddy's Bob Parsons Started Slow | Yes |
Newspaper | Marine Corps News | Former Marine, Go Daddy CEO Talks About His Rise | Yes |
Newspaper | NY Times | Blogging While Browsing, but Not Buying | No |
Newspaper | Arizona Republic | GoDaddy Goes public | No |
Newspaper | Arizona Republic | Parsons divorces after 2 years | No |
Newspaper | USA Today | Chest Ads built buzz, but also animosity | Yes |
Newspaper | USA Today | GoDaddy.com surfs publicity wave on racy ad | No |
News Television | CNN | GoDaddy traffic soars | No |
Online News | World Net Daily | [http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=42772 GoDaddy.com chief: From Bible to breasts] | Yes |
Low Circ Mag | Bible Software Review | An interview with Craig Rairdin | No |
Newsletter | Legalzoom | Rags to Riches: Bob Parsons, Founder of GoDaddy.com | Yes |
Blog | Red State Patriot | Creator of QuickVerse speaks about GoDaddy and Parsons | Yes |
Blog | McCarthy.vg | Why I'm No Longer a GoDaddy Customer | Yes |
Blog | Confusability.com | NoGoDaddy | Yes |
Blog | Daily Kos | GoDaddy president retracts pro-torture blog posting | Yes |
Auto-Bio | Craig Rairdin | How I Got Into this Mess | Yes |
Auto-Bio | Bob Parsons | My Bio | No |
For full disclosure, ParsonsRep is affiliated with GoDaddy.com.
ParsonsRep (
talk)
21:01, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
Just a quick comment - I don't care that much on ISO dates - I just think it is nice for international users of Wikipedia. if we link the dates (there are different ways to do it - I like ISO because it is easy to remember) then the dates will show the way the user wants. see m:Dynamic dates for info - also m:Help:Preferences#Date format. The style guide indicates its a nicety from what I can tell see Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#ISO date formats and surrounding topics. Trödel 14:22, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
The Good article nomination for Bob Parsons has failed, for the following reason(s):
Full Disclosure: ParsonsRep is affiliated with GoDaddy.com. We want the notice "This article or section is written like an advertisement." removed as we re-wrote the Go Daddy section to be more Bob-centric and fact based. ParsonsRep ( talk) 21:36, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
I ended up on the Bob Parsons page after seeing him on a reality show and trying to remember the specific comments he'd made regarding the US use of torture. I was disappointed to find zero mention of it on this page (and, at the moment, no mention on the Go Daddy page). It's clearly one of the 2 or 3 most common things known about Bob Parsons, and it seems incredibly relevant to anyone doing research on him. Can there be some mention, and quoting of his statements, even if under a disclaimer that they were later retracted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Davebug ( talk • contribs) 22:23, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
I have removed this entry because there's no source, completely failing verifiability. Do not re-include this section into the article without citing published sources. Basileias ( talk) 00:34, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
I deleted the controversy section. The eco- and animal-rights-sensitive editors here need to look at things with a cool head. Dr. Parsons is just another big game hunter. There’s nothing illegal about killing an elephant in Zimbabwe, in fact he did it with the full blessing of the authorities there. The morality of doing such a thing is of course subjective. This is only big news right now because PETA somehow only found out now about Parsons being a big game hunter, and decided to throw a big snit over it. — TheHerbalGerbil( TALK| STALK), 11:16, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
This section is not NPOV because it gives copious space for Parsons to lay out his argument in his own words without giving equal space to critics. An attempt to flesh out the elephant controversy has been repeatedly deleted in an edit war. I'm of the opinion that leopard controversy should also be added, particularly as Mr. Parsons recently deleted it from his site and served Youtube with a takedown notice. I also strongly believe that Mr. Parsons remarks about torture of Guantanamo detainees should be included since they were widely reported. Brmull ( talk) 08:48, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
Most people agree that a blog is considered a RS regarding the person or organization that publishes that blog. Therefore HSUS.typepad.com is considered a RS about what the Humane Society said. I'm not going to revert it but I am determined to have NPOV in this section and not just 10 lines of what Bob Parsons says. Brmull ( talk) 22:44, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
BLP's shouldn't have controversy sections. The material should be worked into the body of the article. If you need an example, see the Mel Gibson article. This material needs to be re-worked.
Remove immediately any contentious material about a living person that is unsourced or poorly sourced; that is a conjectural interpretation of a source (see No original research); that relies on self-published sources, unless written by the subject of the BLP (see below); or that relies on sources that fail in some other way to comply with Verifiability. Note: although the three-revert rule does not apply to such removals, what counts as exempt under BLP can be controversial. Editors who find themselves in edit wars over potentially defamatory material about living persons should consider raising the matter at the BLP noticeboard instead of relying on the exemption.
On March 8, 2011, while vacationing in Labola, Zimbabwe, Parsons shot and killed an elephant that was scavenging through a local farmer's crops for food. After the kill villagers are shown harvesting the elephant's for its meat [1]
In the video, Parson's states that, "Of everything that I do this is the most rewarding." Parsons stood by that sentiment, later stating:
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals Senior Vice President Dan Matthews told CNN's Piers Morgan Tonight that "we have taken our business with Go Daddy and gone elsewhere, and that's what we're encouraging other people to do."
[4]
Basileias (
talk)
03:07, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
Also I suggest this as a better image, it's on top in google image search and apparently is public domain. I know the one there is the one he puts on his biz, but it's common to show celebrities at their best where possible. 72.228.177.92 ( talk) 16:57, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
Oliver Stone is one example of a BLP which has a "Controversy" section. A search brings up a few hundred others. Brmull ( talk) 22:00, 6 April 2011 (UTC) I'm not going to put up new edits only to have them constantly reverted by the "Bob did A, PETA protested" folks. The burden is on them to put up something and then we'll work on it. If that doesn't happen I'm inclined to flag this article for NPOV dispute. Brmull ( talk) 22:00, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This article's
"criticism" or "controversy" section may compromise the article's
neutrality. (August 2010) |
Submitted the following request for administrator help:
Parsons, who is CEO of GoDaddy.com, was recently in the national news for videotaping himself killing elephants and a leopard in Zimbabwe. PETA and the Humane Society called for a boycott of GoDaddy. Some editors of Parson's page have repeatedly reverted any attempt to mention this event, while refusing to offer their own compromise wording. Editor/administrator input is requested to decided whether the event should be mentioned, whether it should be part of another section or its own section, and how the wording will be determined. Thanks!
In the meantime I flagged the article for POV dispute until the issue is resolved. Brmull ( talk) 09:40, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
{{
cite web}}
: Text "access date - 2011 -30-03" ignored (
help)
{{
cite web}}
: Text "access date - 2011 -29-03" ignored (
help)
{{
cite web}}
: Text "access date - 2011 -30-03" ignored (
help)
{{
cite web}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)
Hi, I saw the section at the BLPN and came to have a look, I don't see much of a reason to add this here, it is more at home on the Go Daddy article as PETA withdrawing their business with Go Daddy makes in a bit noteworthy there. At the most a carefully worded sentence, such as ... and the way the article is currently it would neen its own header - I don't think it worthy of one but if need be then..Animal rights should suffice and is neutral enough description of the issue....
In 2011 Parsons was criticized by PETA and environmentalists after he uploaded a video of himself shooting and killing an elephant in Zimbabwe to his personal blog, the shooting was at the request of tribal authorities to protect their crops for harvest.[1][2]
I can see the talk page is being ignored on this recent issue with the insertion of these edits.
He has recently been under media scrutiny after posting a video of himself slaughtering elephants in Zimbabwe while on vacation.
Parsons has recently been under pressure for hunting elephants in Zimbabwe. He refers to them as 'problem elephants'. PETA and other activist groups have made it a mission to boycott GoDaddy.com for his actions.
I think a moratorium on this issue is warranted because of the continual insertion of edits that clearly violate the WP:BLP.
Instead of "criticized" I'd like to propose "denounced." I know it's late, but I think it's a lot less cliché'd if that makes sense. Today, everyone is "criticized" but denounced seems a bit more clear and to the point, at least to me. Let me know what you think. Now common Brmull, you've got to admit after hashing out a better write up this is a lot better than what was originally there. ;-) I'm sure it's not agreeable to everyone but what's there now is much, much more professional. Basileias ( talk) 03:07, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
A brand new account, probably opened just for this purpose, added to our proposed section. I'm not sure it really added to what it looks like we may settle on.
Additional pictures have surfaced on the internet showing Bob Parsons with slaughtered animals such as a Gnu and young Zimbabwe Elephant. The website also posted photographic evidence proving there were other ways to "protect farmers' fields" without killing severely endangered animals. - |work = Killi.net - |accessdate = 2011-04-13 - |title = Animals Bob 'Godaddy' Parson has Slaughtered - |url = http://rs79.vrx.net/works/photoessays/2011/godaddy/
Hello, I just wanted to let you know, I am new to making edits and was not trying to get in an edit war. I am still trying to figure out the ropes. I would like to add that there are new pictures surfacing that do need serious consideration. Parsons has been allowed to give his point of view, but evidence suggesting other circumstances is out there. Photographs don't lie. If you don't want to include the articles, that is one thing, but why not post the pictures and videos and let the public decide how to interpret them. Parsons is clearly standing over some endangered species. So post them, then you don't have to worry about people stating "opinions." It is starting to feel like Parsons is controlling and manipulating the media and using his influence to stop facts from surfacing. Please consider posting the video and pictures. Best, Nadja Rescue Nadja Rescue ( talk) 08:01, 17 April 2011 (UTC)Nadja Rescue
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Bob Parsons. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 00:33, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
I have a conflict of interest and won't edit this article. I'd like to request that the following edit requests be reviewed and implemented if they are acceptable. Both references are the same but I don't know how to combine them.
In the Bob_Parsons#Political_activities section, please add this sentence to the top: Parsons is a registered Independent. [1]
Please also add this sentence to the end of that same section: On April 25, 2023, Parsons told Esquire that he no longer supports former U.S. President Donald Trump, stating “I did vote for him, but I'm no longer a fan.” He explained that his opinion on Donald Trump changed with the insurrection along with reading various books on what happened during Trump’s presidency and how he ran his office. “The number one thing I care about is our country and who's going to do the best job. I'm not a Democrat, and I'm not a Republican. I'm a registered Independent. I just want this country to be what it can be.” He added that in retrospect, the U.S. president that he thinks most highly of is former U.S. President Barack Obama. [2] MusicJunkie14 ( talk) 16:35, 28 July 2023 (UTC) MusicJunkie14 ( talk) 16:35, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
References
![]() | This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
Hi - thanks Wjemather for addressing my second request. I'm reposting my first request.
In the Bob_Parsons#Political_activities section, please add this sentence to the top: Parsons is a registered Independent. [1]
Also, please add the following to the end of the political section. (I fixed a typo in the source name): He added that in retrospect, the U.S. president that he thinks most highly of is former U.S. President Barack Obama. [1] Thank you. MusicJunkie14 ( talk) 17:28, 9 August 2023 (UTC)