Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Logan (playwright)
- 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 delete. Cirt (talk) 07:09, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- David Logan (playwright) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Non-notable spam. This article was started and maintained by sockpuppets from Brisbane (where David Logan hails), suggesting incredibly bad faith COI. The addition of David Logan references to all mention of Dracula in wikipedia suggests a concerted spamming attempt. Best have all of it taken off wikipedia. VsevolodKrolikov (talk) 17:19, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note Twinkle tried notifying the people who've actively maintained this article, but I think as they've all been banned, it encountered a bug.VsevolodKrolikov (talk) 17:23, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. The ISBNs and play/book names draw a pretty clear zilch on google. The author is published by something called Brisbane Dramatic Arts Company, and I can't find that company publishing anything else than his writings, suggesting that Brisbane Dramatic Arts Company is Mr. Loagan's laser printer. Not a single reliable source or evidence of notability in sight. Nice doggy (talk) 17:51, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as not notable. I also agree there are COI/vanity issues. Please note when Googling that there are a couple of David Logans who are likely notable and get a lot of g-hits, including John David Logan a very notable award-winning Hollywood writer and playwright. However, IMHO this particular David Logan is not notable as a playwright, historian, novelist, director, teacher or an academic. The article has been tagged multiple times by different editors for article issues (notability, sources etc) but each time socks repeatedly remove the tags without comment and without resolving any of the identified issues, so I think it's best that this is going through AFD. Sarah 01:55, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom and Sarah. Orderinchaos 10:18, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 17:28, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I am really amazed at what appears to be a very libellous attack on the repuation of a respected academic and writer. I wonder how many of the above editors have ever bothered to read anything that Dr. Logan has written or just engage in vindictive libellous attacks? Dr. Logan's works are in university libraries and schools. He has also lectured at international congresses.
User talk:Alerox75 17:42, 3 August 2009 (UTC) — Alerox75 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
- You may have the wrong David Logan. Could you provide us with details of these congresses?VsevolodKrolikov (talk) 17:37, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 17:28, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete None of his books are in either WorldCat, the australian National Library, or the union catalog of australian public libraries. DGG (talk) 05:37, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- correction--because the name is very common, I searched only for the works indicated in the article as particularly notable, and failed to find them. I see from what follows there are some, but I do not see that they are at all notable. DGG (talk) 04:44, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There seems to be a very serious situation developing here where a number of editors are seriously maligning Dr. Logan with gross inaccuracies.
A search of the following catalogues produces these results on Dr. Logan's publications: State Library of Queensland where he is listed as a significant writer for Queensland. There are 10 works listed:
Dr. Logan's works are listed clearly at the National Library of Australia.
Libraries Australia website: http://www.librariesaustralia.nla.gov.au
Also list Dr. Logan's works as does WorldCat. We're All In This Together http://www.worldcat.org/search?q=isbn%3A9780980456349
All other publications are listed.
[[User talk: davidcs73, 09:07, 4 July 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Davidcs73 (talk • contribs) — Davidcs73 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
It would seem there is a very serious miscarriage of justice happening here to libel and malign Dr. Logan. I would suggest it stops. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Davidcs73 (talk • contribs) 08:05, 4 August 2009 (UTC) — Davidcs73 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
- This edit [1] demonstrates that Davidcs73 edits from an identical IP range and location to the Finneganw/Aussiebrisguy sockpuppeteer. DrKiernan (talk) 09:14, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Finneganw/Davidcs/Aussiebrisguy etc, editors and admins have been flagging this article as having issues and not meeting Wikipedia's policies since you created it three years ago but you've resisted any attempt to try to address issues and have engaged socks to protect it in your preferred form. The bottom line is as they stand these articles don't conform with notability guidelines or the verifiability and biographies of living people policies and unless they are brought in line with policy and guideline they can't stay here. Having books held by the NLA does not make the book or author notable. Please read the notability guidelines, particularly Wikipedia:Notability (academics) and Wikipedia:Notability (books) which will help you address concerns about notability. Please look particularly at the "criteria" section and then please explain under which criteria this teacher and his book, characters etc qualify under Wikipedia's criteria as "notable" academic, book, characters etc. I understand this isn't a great experience and we can blank this discussion at the end if you feel maligned but we need to address and resolve the issues surrounding this subject which you have been blatantly pushing on Wikipedia for several years now. I'm afraid at this stage it looks like trying to use Wikipedia for promotional purposes. If that's not the case then we would certainly welcome you addressing concerns about these articles. Sarah 16:09, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It would seem that both Davidcs and Alerox, both users created only to talk about this topic, have magically made a mistake about which David Logan we are talking about. If you're sockpuppets, which I think you are, take a good look at yourself, David. Wikipedia is global. People here are from all over the world. Is this debate the kind of publicity you want? Remember that this discussion is preserved forever.VsevolodKrolikov (talk) 16:00, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, unfortunately the influx of blatant socks is pretty consistent with the past history of this user. Sarah 16:09, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I think Logan's publications are very close to self-published. When you Google "Brisbane Dramatic Arts Company" it only seems to bring up references to Logan's books, which this Arts Company apparently published. [2] It's very strange and there doesn't seem to be such an Arts Company outside Logan's books. That's something he's going to need to address if he wants to argue that they're notable books. Sarah 16:21, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Non-notable. DrKiernan (talk) 08:58, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- As somebody who knows of the work of Australian writers, I have had the pleasure of reading different plays and novels. I have read many such works. Dr. Logan and others write well. Wikipedia does well to have an entry on Australian writers. Dr Logan is a respected educator and writer. I find it strange therefore to see an attempt being made to discredit him by wanting to remove information about him that is there for the benefit of others. That is after all what Wikipedia is there for so others can benefit. Removing information greatly harms us all. I can only put this attempt down to the fact that some very ignorant people have very little to do with their time and obtain pleasure from injuring the reputation of others. I find this an appalling practice that needs to be condemned. I have seen this sort of thing attempted by disaffected people with severe social problems. It would appear that there are a few of them here commenting on this page. They really should get a life.
User talk: Alexey-Chernykh 08:46, 5 August 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.179.135.223 (talk) [reply]
- Delete Not notable, fails WP:AUTHOR. There are several accounts posting here, but no one has provided any evidence that subject satisfies WP:GNG. The academic achievements are fine, but they fail WP:PROF. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnuniq (talk • contribs) 12:41, 5 August 2009 [3]
- note the only books by the David Logan in question at either of the links above are published by the Brisbane Dramatic Arts Company. None of the other works are remotely within his field, and most fall outside any possible date for him to have published. It doesn't indicate any notability at all. Any book by an Australian can be to these libraries if donated. It's getting real world unethical for someone to pass off other people's works as his own. Do we know if there's any way we can check on the truth of his academic credentials? There's enough grounds for suspecting they might be false. The article page is very careful not to mention exactly where his PhD and DLitt come from. Could any of the accounts defending David Logan oblige us? After all, a DLitt is no ordinary degree - it usually is given to esteemed academics - with a long history of publication (in peer-reviewed journals). Which he doesn't appear to have. If he's an academic fraud as well, it might be worth notifying the libraries which hold his books.VsevolodKrolikov (talk) 14:16, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Another note. I've done a few searches for "David Logan" and the terms PhD and DLitt and the names of the universities mentioned in his article. Nothing comes up. This may be a genuine case of real-life academic fraud on our hands. (He calls himself "Dr" on a couple of sites).VsevolodKrolikov (talk) 14:35, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- And another. No evidence to be found of his attendance, let alone his speaking at the International Drama/Theatre and Education Association gathering in Hong Kong. Are we dealing with a kind of Walter Mitty character here? (Or perhaps more like Jeffrey Archer without the money or independent reviews?) VsevolodKrolikov (talk) 14:52, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Another note. I've done a few searches for "David Logan" and the terms PhD and DLitt and the names of the universities mentioned in his article. Nothing comes up. This may be a genuine case of real-life academic fraud on our hands. (He calls himself "Dr" on a couple of sites).VsevolodKrolikov (talk) 14:35, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- note the only books by the David Logan in question at either of the links above are published by the Brisbane Dramatic Arts Company. None of the other works are remotely within his field, and most fall outside any possible date for him to have published. It doesn't indicate any notability at all. Any book by an Australian can be to these libraries if donated. It's getting real world unethical for someone to pass off other people's works as his own. Do we know if there's any way we can check on the truth of his academic credentials? There's enough grounds for suspecting they might be false. The article page is very careful not to mention exactly where his PhD and DLitt come from. Could any of the accounts defending David Logan oblige us? After all, a DLitt is no ordinary degree - it usually is given to esteemed academics - with a long history of publication (in peer-reviewed journals). Which he doesn't appear to have. If he's an academic fraud as well, it might be worth notifying the libraries which hold his books.VsevolodKrolikov (talk) 14:16, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.