Jump to content

Talk:StankDawg

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Tqbf (talk | contribs) at 02:32, 12 October 2007 (reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconBiography Start‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Notability

Why does this attention whore get a page all to himself? And how has he affected the hacking scene that greatly? He seems like a new age n00b to me. ( Anonymous comment posted 19:43, September 5, 2005 by 70.67.163.34)

Stank's probably had more direct influence in the "hacking scene" than any "famous" hackers (mitnick, poulsen) ever have.

--Othtim 06:50, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Plenty of non-notable people have gotten short speaking slots at Defcon or HOPE.

WP:N -notable people have independent, notable secondary source validation. Where are his? It appears as if this person is notable primarily for having a podcast. I've never heard of "techdecisions" --- a peripheral mention on an insurance industry IT trade pub? Tqbf 02:49, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Things that need sourcing

I'm going to strip out the following things if they aren't sourced reliably:

  • "Worked for various companies and large institutions"
  • Guest instructor for professional certification company --- which one? Cite sources.
  • "Reportedly found himself getting annoyed"
  • BR Magazine (actually, I'm going to AfD this if it's not sourced and notable)
  • Appearances on radio shows --- because he founded BinRev, this would be implied, so the explicit reference leaves the impression he's been on the public airwaves. Which shows?
  • "volunteer webcasts, presentations, or Q/A sessions to private corporations.". Cite sources.
  • "many television interviews for local news channels in the state of Florida,". Cite sources.
  • "routinely bringing thousands of downloads, and inspiring over a dozen other cyberculture and "Hacker Media" shows and podcasts.". Cite sources. Also, "thousands of downloads" is in the noise floor for Internet content.

Rename

This article should be renamed "David Blake". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tqbf (talk • contribs) 01:32, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NPF

Per WP:NPF, this person may be notable enough for a WP entry, but is clearly not generally well-known. Therefore, "editors should exercise restraint and include only material relevant to their notability".

Subject's high school and siblings are not relevant to his notability, and therefore don't belong in the article.

--- tqbf 23:31, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, by an extremely strict interpretation of WP:NPF yes, but I'm not sure that that's the intent of that guideline. My understanding of NPF is to avoid information like, "He has a dog, he really enjoys watching reality shows on TV, he used to doodle a lot, and that's how he got into art in the first place, he has several self-published pamphlets about how to grow tulips, etc." Some simple biographical info (parents, schools attended, workplace) is the kind of thing we're going to want in any article no matter what. I tend to look at it like an interpretation of WP:AUTO -- there are some things that even the subject of an article is welcome to change/update on their own biography: "you should feel free to correct mistaken or out-of-date facts about yourself, such as marital status, current employer, place of birth" So when it comes to those kinds of things, I see no problem with including them in a bio, even if they're not directly relevant to notability, and as long as there is no reasonable concern that the information is incorrect. --Elonka 01:04, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think you'll lose this argument:
  1. You're arguing with the plain wording of WP:NPF, which I quoted.
  2. Your examples of NN content fit the content I removed ("grew up in X, moved to Y, went to Z high school")
  3. Those same examples are damaging to the subject's notability as a whole, since "self-published pamphlets on tulip growing" aren't far from where this subject rests in the WP.
  4. A quick survey of other security experts in the WP shows very few examples, even in highly notable subjects, of high school attendence. See, for example, Steve Bellovin, Theo de Raad, Paul Kocher, or even Mark Abene, who was most notable during his high school years.
Care to address any of those points? Appreciated! As you know, the subtext here is that I think this article is innappropriate for the WP period, a case which I think will be easier to make when the article is scrubbed of indefensible content.
--- tqbf 02:32, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:StankDawg&oldid=163959661"