.... |
→StankDawg: +Keep |
||
Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
*** How did you become so savvy in so few edits? Did you have another account before? - [[User:Jehochman|Jehochman]] <sup>[[User_talk:Jehochman|Talk]]</sup> 17:38, 13 September 2007 (UTC) |
*** How did you become so savvy in so few edits? Did you have another account before? - [[User:Jehochman|Jehochman]] <sup>[[User_talk:Jehochman|Talk]]</sup> 17:38, 13 September 2007 (UTC) |
||
**** Happy to answer more questions on talk pages, but for the sake of clarity here: I care passionately about the computer security field, am disappointed by its uneven coverage here, and am doing my best to clean it up. I'm a newcomer, but I believe I've read the guidelines very carefully.[[User:tqbf|<font color="black" face="courier">tqbf</font>]] 17:41, 13 September 2007 (UTC) |
**** Happy to answer more questions on talk pages, but for the sake of clarity here: I care passionately about the computer security field, am disappointed by its uneven coverage here, and am doing my best to clean it up. I'm a newcomer, but I believe I've read the guidelines very carefully.[[User:tqbf|<font color="black" face="courier">tqbf</font>]] 17:41, 13 September 2007 (UTC) |
||
***** Fair enough. Take my comment as a compliment. Leave me a talk message if you want to explain what you think needs improving. Maybe I can help. - [[User:Jehochman|Jehochman]] <sup>[[User_talk:Jehochman|Talk]]</sup> 17:45, 13 September 2007 (UTC) |
|||
* '''Keep''' Notability is not subjective. This article has references, they check out, and there's obvious notability because the references support this start-class article. An article can be deleted if the references are so thin that the article can never be more than a stub. That's not the case here. - [[User:Jehochman|Jehochman]] <sup>[[User_talk:Jehochman|Talk]]</sup> 17:45, 13 September 2007 (UTC) |
Revision as of 17:45, 13 September 2007
StankDawg
Per WP:N; thousands of NN people can cite the same credentials. Article asserts notability with appeals to a podcast, calling it a "radio show". Subject has two superficial press hits in "IT Jungle" and "Technology Decisions"; neither of these are notable secondary sources (as a data point, neither pub is mentioned in the Wikipedia, unlike major tech pubs like eWeek, ZDNet, CNET, or IDG). Subject has written many articles for 2600, but lots of NN people write articles for 2600, which is a "zine". Subject had a "major" presentation at HOPE, a 2nd tier security venue, in 2004, but no major presentations since then (like many NN security practitioners, he has been a recurring panelist at some 2nd tier venues and has hosted his podcast from them, which this article claims as a presentation). Note that article's primary assertion of notability is the "Binary Revolution Radio" podcast; but the talk page for Binary Revolution Radio asserts notability by association to the subject of this article! Posted a WP:N notice on the article 5 days ago, put a reason on the talk page, no response. Nobody will know who this person is 10 years from now. Let's delete the article. Tqbf 17:38, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
- Delete on notability and WP:ATT grounds. Many of the article references are pretty dodgy, and the first few pages of a google search turn up mostly blogs and board hits. There are mentions of security-related presentations in reasonable sources, but nothing like the 'significant coverage' that would establish notability. I could find little to back up the article content in the refs given. EyeSereneTALK 19:07, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 04:42, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
- Keep. The subject of this article clearly meets WP:BIO. He has founded notable organizations within the technology scene, has written extensively in a variety of publications, has co-hosted a highly-regarded show for several years now, and is even viewed by the mainstream as an expert, by the fact that he has also appeared on television programs, from "talking head" pieces to a longer segment on the "Super Sharks" documentary. He also lectures widely on the subject of technology, and pulls in audiences of several hundred people at multiple major conferences, from HOPE to Def Con. The subject also has a substantial fanbase, and his name is well-known enough that multiple people have been working on his bio, and it's had to be pared down to the "most notable" stuff. Caveat: I have met this individual and was invited to appear on his show a few times, but we have no financial relationship of any kind. I do, however, as one of the people within this field, affirm that StankDawg is clearly notable within it. --Elonka 17:18, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
- Rebut: re "I affirm StankDawg's notability": there's no guideline that offers you the ability to transitively assign notability to your friends. We can argue the degree of notability you have in my field in a different venue (I can secondary-source myself deeper than you can, but am not arrogant enough to believe I belong in an encyclopedia). But "I affirm StankDawg is notable" is a non-argument.tqbf 17:39, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
- Comment The nominating account Tqbf (talk · contribs) has a very limited amount of activity on Wikipedia. This may be a bad-faith nom. --Elonka 17:18, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
- No reason for ad hominem, a reply I offer as a confirmation of good faith intent to see this NN page removed.tqbf 17:36, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
- How did you become so savvy in so few edits? Did you have another account before? - Jehochman Talk 17:38, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
- Happy to answer more questions on talk pages, but for the sake of clarity here: I care passionately about the computer security field, am disappointed by its uneven coverage here, and am doing my best to clean it up. I'm a newcomer, but I believe I've read the guidelines very carefully.tqbf 17:41, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
- How did you become so savvy in so few edits? Did you have another account before? - Jehochman Talk 17:38, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
- No reason for ad hominem, a reply I offer as a confirmation of good faith intent to see this NN page removed.tqbf 17:36, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
- Keep Notability is not subjective. This article has references, they check out, and there's obvious notability because the references support this start-class article. An article can be deleted if the references are so thin that the article can never be more than a stub. That's not the case here. - Jehochman Talk 17:45, 13 September 2007 (UTC)