Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dave Hart

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Speedy deleted by subject/author request. El_C 13:07, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dave Hart[edit]

Dave Hart (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Unremarkable subject/person...lack of notability...does not rise to the level of notoriety necessary for inclusion...classic vanity page (forgive me for using the term, but it's true) which in previous incarnations has included contributions from the subject such as labeling himself a 'great man' and pretending to be a third-party "attesting" to the subject's community involvement and charitable activities [1]...Mr. Hart then attempted to cover his tracks by blanking the talk page entry, including a subsequent response from a user raising WP:COI objections to the article. PassionoftheDamon 10:50, 28 December 2006 (UTC):[reply]

  • Delete per. nom. Not a prominent figure. Also, his website hails his entry into Wikipedia, which makes this seem like a vanity page of sorts. ~~ Meeples (talk)(email) 10:58, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • We will add the additional reasons and proof of the notoriety. Every step that I have been insructed to do to keep this article on WIlk has been done. Why do I keep recieving deletion threats? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davehart (talk • contribs)
  • With all do respect, as I mentioned, why do you consider Dave Hart to hace a lack of notability? Mr. Hart is known throughout the United States and has been an imporatant figure in many areas. In, since the main page was created, we have strived to follow every request to add references, etc. Also, just FYI the WILI link from the Dave Hart website has been removed since this seemed to be a problem. WHat in the world do we have to do to keep this page other than all of the changes and additions that we have already made. It seems to me that no page is safe and perhaps it may pass with 15 editors but then when one finds it to be non imporatant it gets deleted. Is this how Wikipedia works? Should I just gove up here or what?? I truly feel that this is a proper contribution to Wikipedia and just because you haven't heard of Dave Hart doesn't mean that thousands or millions of others haven't. (Steve, on behalf of Dave Hart) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davehart (talk • contribs)
    • WP:BIO gives the requirements for notability. If Dave Hart is so well known, then you'll have no trouble finding plenty of supporting evidence from reliable sources (major newspapers, magazines, commentators, for example) which will allow others to verify all the information in the article. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 11:25, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Aside from the references provided most of the "supporting evidence" is in print or on video. Shall I upload this information? Please help me here as I want to convey this. Example, Mr Hart has recently been inducted into the United STates Library of Congress' Who's Who In Executives and Professionals. Mr. Harts office has the documents but how can we get them to you? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davehart (talk • contribs) 6:25, 28 December 2006
      • Over 100,000 people are listed in the Who's Who of which you speak [2]. It hardly supplies the level of notoriety necessary for inclusion. WP:COI expressly states with respect to Who's Who directories:

        "These registries' criteria for listing are, as a rule, over-inclusive and may be nonexistent; some are vanity publishers and offer listing for a fee. The inclusion of a name in such a publication is therefore not sufficient to guarantee notability."

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a professional listing or a yellow pages. Might I also remind you, Mr. Hart, that you are violating WP:COI by editing your page and participating in this deletion discussion? Also, please remember to sign your comments. -PassionoftheDamon 11:57, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Who's Who accepts payment for an individual to be listed, thus compromising its independence as a listing of influential people (contrary to popular perception). Tarinth 13:58, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • You haven't cited any evidence at all. You've listed the names of newspapers. A proper citation of a reference gives the date and the name of the newspaper article. Someone has to be able to check the citation - with these non-citations someone would have to read the entire archive of the newspaper. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 12:00, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • It's not the US LoC's Who's Who. It's registered in the LoC; i.e. someone paid the thirty bucks to register it for a copyright. I'd be surprised if anyone but the people in it cared about it.--Prosfilaes 12:06, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Do what you must. We will contact you when we get the supporting evidence that you require. Thank you all.--davehart 12:14, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:COI. Dave Hart created the article himself, and FYI, he already has his own User page, which basically says the same things. JRHorse 14:39, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Vanity article. Annamonckton 18:28, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - there's no evidence of notability, no attempt to provide reliable sources, and all the hallmarks of an article written by or on behalf of its subject for promotional reasons. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 18:32, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. There are many, many accomplished persons who are not, by Wikipedia standards, notable. We can't include them all. Wikipedia is not a resume-posting service. --Dhartung | Talk 19:44, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete It - Stop wasting time talking about it. Just delete the damn thing. Just for the record, I am Dave Hart's web master, I am not Dave Hart. You folks keep saying that this is a conflict of interest because "Dave Hart is editing his own page!" I know the WIKI rules and if I was trying to be sneeky, why the hell would I have created the username of Dave Hart and not my own? When I sat the account up, I assumed that the username had to be the title name as well. WOW, you spent so much time anylizing this!! I set this page up (not as a marketing tool) but as many people consider Mr. Hart to be "imporatant." I am sorry that you don't, but you do have the power to delete the biography so DO IT!! Also, since all of you think you have figured it out see these notes: Passion of the... wrote "subject such as labeling himself a 'great man' and pretending to be a third-party "attesting" to the subject's community involvement and charitable activities ...Mr. Hart then attempted to cover his tracks by blanking the talk page entry, including a subsequent response from a user raising WP:COI objections to the article." MY Response, Dave Hart is a great man and does many charitable activities. It amazes me how much you spent going through the history on this stuff thinking you are diugging up "dirt" on someone. And then I, Steven Reed NOT Dave Hart did not try to "blank the talk page entry" to cover anything up. I made the necessary changes then I thought that I was able to delete the notes stating the errors since they had been fixed. There you go, now stop wasting time and just delete the Dave Hart page. People try to contribute to this site and you shoot them down. It's not like I stuck a site up of a local gas station of something..(here is my signed username : DAVE HART)
  • Although since just thoroughly reading the details on COI I agree, I think that some of you have forgotten about your own WIKI rule:

"During debates in articles' talk pages and at articles for deletion, disparaging comments may fly about the subject of the article/author and the author's motives. These may border on personal attacks, and may discourage the article's creator from future considerate contributions. Avoid using the word "vanity" in a deletion discussion — such an accusation may be defamatory. Please assume good faith, and don't bite the newcomers."

May I say that this is exactly what has happened here. After recieving constructive criticism from WIKI user such as Elonka, we made the effort to do everything to make the user page acceptable. Then, suddenly this morning all of the derogatory accusations began flying. Of coarse I take it personnal when those who are avid WIKI's appear to be dirt digging and trying to make it as if I have tried doing things towards the wrong. Issues such as deleting an item from an editor was done because I did not know any different. As it was mentioned, I thought that once the issue was addressed, the editors note be deleted. My Bad!! But please don't try to make like I am trying to cover something up. I will speak with Jimmy about this next week. JR Horse used the term Vanity several times. Also, this is not conflict of interest, the actual Dave Hart has only seen the WIKI page of himself a couple of times and I did not recieve any compansation to create it. I am paid to manage his corporate website only. Thanks, Steve R on behalf of User talk:Dave Hart 16:09, 28 December 2006

  • Delete, insufficient WP:RS indicating subject is notable per WP:BIO. Aside to creator of article: WP:COI does not necessarily mean a subject is writing about oneself; see the section on that guideline page for "close relationships". As his webmaster (per your own admission), an article by you on him seems to fall under the purview of that. --Kinu t/c 21:13, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • For clarity, WP:COI is not limited to subjects writing about themselves, but also to people who are close to the subject. It's not an attack on you or Mr. Hart to nominate the article for deletion. It's simply a process of limiting articles only to ones that meet Wikipedia's notability standards. 206.213.209.31 21:18, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I understand completly. That was very well put and I agree that it should be deleted. I should have read the rules better before creating the article. I am sorry for the trouble. Steve R on behalf of User talk:Dave Hart 16:24, 28 December 2006
  • Steve, just shpw the facts. I have heard of Dave Hart and I live in Canada. All they need are references of proof. I have seen him on television, so I am sure that you have some direct links to print ads or something. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davehart (talk • contribs) Dec 28
  • Super-Strong Delete. For VANITY-yes VANITY and self-promotion Dave, Steve or whoever you want to call yourself. Articles such as this make me want to vomit. You are not special. You are somebody when you meet the wikipedia requirements AND somebody else writes an article about you (or makes less than the 100 edits you spent countless nights tediously making. MiracleMat 07:30, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy close as delete per request of User:Davehart at this edit on his talk page (and above comment "Delete It"). --Dhartung | Talk 08:57, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • User:MiracleMat has it ALL figured out! you are a smart person and must have a college education. I'll hold the bag while you vomit!! VANITY-yes VANITY VANITY-yes VANITY "You are not special"... I need to go and cry now because you have hurt my feelings. Damn, I may have created a page about someone that I know, but you are the one preaching WIKI bla bla rules and your breaking your own. My last entry was very polite and now your just being an a*s hole!!
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Dave_Hart&oldid=1087584618"