Steve and Wikipedia

[Jes]

Not too long ago, the Steve Pavlina entry on Wikipedia was deleted and permanently locked. Now it just seems like it never existed. Anyone know the story behind this? Was there ever an entry? What was it like?

[{aspiring_to_clarity}]

There was a thread about it here a while back

[Dan.Linehan]

I went ahead and created one:

Steve pavlina - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It's a stub basically. needs fleshed out.

If anyone has time it would be nice to put it in the format of Tony Robbins - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

[Dan.Linehan]

And... it was deleted.

Wow, that was fast.

[{aspiring_to_clarity}]

Hey, Dan. I'm not terribly familiar with Wikipedia...was it deleated by some other person or some kind of 'admin'? Meaning, I guess, is Steve just plain ole not allowed on there? And why on earth would that be?

[Michelle]

I think the Deleter should explain himself.

[Dan.Linehan]

I sent this for deletion review to the deleter.

Regarding the delete of Steve Pavlina article - the site gets millions of hits a month, and destroys Tony Robbins in popularity, who wikipedia retains a massive article for.

Check alexa for StevePavlina.com traffic versus TonyRobbins.com

Got this response:

The article would need sources. See WP:BIO for guidelines on biographies. Friday (talk) 18:18, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

I can check it out more this weekend, or anyone else can feel free to follow up.

It looks like as long as we create a page that meets those bio standards we should good to go.

[{aspiring_to_clarity}]

Dan covered what I said in the above post...

[Dan.Linehan]

Press release:

Steve Pavlina, to join Las Vegas Convention Speakers Bureau

Do interviews count as sources?

Steve Pavlina Interview - Part 1 | Entrepreneurs-Journey.com by Yaro Starak
Steve Pavlina Interview - Part 2 | Entrepreneurs-Journey.com by Yaro Starak
Interview with Steve Pavlina


The Tony Robbins article has references and external links as well..

[Keith]

It'll be a ton easier when Steve finally publishes his book - then he can be added as a published author.

If you're not that patient, perhaps the avenue is to create an article on the blog itself and argue for its notability. It's probably a lot more widely recognised and referenced than Steve himself.

I note that wikipedia itself refers to stevepavlina.com in the following articles:
Uberman's sleep schedule - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Time boxing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Flow (psychology) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Brown rice - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Polyphasic sleep - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Water fasting - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Social productivity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Self-help - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Amadeus]

My personal opinion is that Steve, a popular blogger, should not be on Wikipedia. They can't have every single person that is known by several people on there. I know there are some people on there with less exposure than Steve, but it's just too much.
It's like this people who run on Wikipedia after every current event to record the news on there like they contributed something of real value. It's redundant.
All the info of the world should not be recorded on there. That is what the internet is for. You can acquire a great deal of information about anything or anybody. It shouldn't all be recorded on Wikipedia. It is pointless, just go on google.

[turbosaab]

Another somewhat well-known blogger, Megan McArdle, was recently deleted for the same reason. Her blog post about this sparked some interesting dicussion re: Wikipedia policies.

Interesting trivia: As of 14 June 2007, there are 200,144 Wikipedia articles on notable living people.

[Dan.Linehan]

Originally Posted by turbosaab

Another somewhat well-known blogger, Megan McArdle,

There are other well-known bloggers besides Steve??

//Mind blown

[Tuumble]

The most maddening thing about this is that get some sports people who no-one has every heard of listed.

Look at this guy Ian Stevens who didn't play at a higher level in Soccer than the English third tier...and look at the length of the entry!

This trivia fact makes him interesting but still a relative underachiever.

Until his promotion with Gretna in 2005, Stevens first as a pro, he had in fact been relegated with every club he had permanently played for apart from Wrexham where he only stayed for one season. In all he was relegated 6 times possibly making him a contender for one of the most jinxed players in English football.

[Brutha]

Another somewhat well-known blogger, Megan McArdle, was recently deleted for the same reason.

She has a alexa rating of 200000. That isn't enough traffic to be considered well known. Steve on the other side has 5000 which is another dimension.

Look at this guy Ian Stevens who didn't play at a higher level in Soccer than the English third tier...and look at the length of the entry!

Have you tried to get that article deleted?

[Tuumble]

Originally Posted by Brutha

Have you tried to get that article deleted?

I haven't tried to get it deleted because it's inclusion is valid as it relates to the histories of particular soccer teams and past squad players. Wikipedia is very useful for that.

My point was that there is no reason why Steve shouldn't be included if guys like Ian Stevens are.

[Keith]

Originally Posted by Dan.Linehan

There are other well-known bloggers besides Steve??

//Mind blown

Though Steve is probably #1 in the field of Personal Development, he's far from the most well-known blogger.

According to Technorati the most popular blog based around an identity (ie. not including aggregator blogs like Boing Boing) is Michelle Malkin's Michelle Malkin, followed immediately by Seth Godin's Seth's Blog. They both have entries on Wikipedia.

Steve's notability is not due to raw popularity, it's due to his popularity in a particular field - that of Personal Development.

P.S. Yes, I know it was a joke.

[Brutha]

According to Technorati the most popular blog based around an identity (ie. not including aggregator blogs like Boing Boing) is Michelle Malkin's Michelle Malkin, followed immediately by Seth Godin's Seth's Blog. They both have entries on Wikipedia.

To be fair Seth Godin would also have an entry if he didn't had that blog.

[Keith]

Originally Posted by Brutha

To be fair Seth Godin would also have an entry if he didn't had that blog.

Which reminds me: is there any chance we could get Steve's article added on the basis that he was the CEO of Dexterity Software? Didn't Dweep win a bunch of awards?

[Keith]

Originally Posted by Keith

Which reminds me: is there any chance we could get Steve's article added on the basis that he was the CEO of Dexterity Software? Didn't Dweep win a bunch of awards?

I've pursued this idea to launch a Deletion Review and have the Protection overturned. I've also dug up a number of media sources to verify his notability as Head of Dexterity software, Blogger/Personal Speaker and Polyphasic Sleep experimenter.

At the moment it's borderline.

Can people with preexisting Wikipedia cred only who genuinely believe that Steve is notable by Wikipedia standards please add their support to this matter? Note: Spamming by new Wikipedians who are obvious Pavlina fans will not help the situation.

The draft article can be found at:Talk:Steve Pavlina - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The deletion review can be found at: Wikipediaeletion review/Log/2007 July 9 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thanks.

[seeker5]

Steve Pavlina became blog entries detailing his experimentation with polyphasic sleep became particularly well known[6][7] and his article "How to become an early riser"[2] was cited in an article on sleep in the UK Newspaper The Guardian[8].

Keith, You might want to correct that draft page you posted. You might want to delete the first "became" and replace it with a " 's ". (I don't have a wikipedia account)

It's very cool reading about Steve's accomplishment prior to launching his personal development career. Lends even more credibility to what he writes about.

I also noticed that on the entry about Dexterity Software - it stated that the company was founded in Las Vegas in 1994. However, I thought Steve had moved to Las Vegas only 3 or so years ago?

[Amadeus]

Can I ask you guys something? What is the big deal whether Steve is on Wikipedia or not? It's not like Steve will have the "be all to end all" validation if he is on one particular website. People will be able to link up to him through any search engine.

[Keith]

Originally Posted by seeker5

Keith, You might want to correct that draft page you posted. You might want to delete the first "became" and replace it with a " 's ". (I don't have a wikipedia account)

Thanks, fixed. And BTW, you don't need to have an account to edit Wikipedia. The main benefit of having an account is that you are able to build a reputation as a reliable editor.

Originally Posted by seeker5

I also noticed that on the entry about Dexterity Software - it stated that the company was founded in Las Vegas in 1994. However, I thought Steve had moved to Las Vegas only 3 or so years ago?

Thanks. I read "Dexterity Software was founded in 1994 and is located in Las Vegas" on Dexterity's page and conflated the two points. You're right, it was not founded in Vegas. Also fixed.

Originally Posted by Amadeus

Can I ask you guys something? What is the big deal whether Steve is on Wikipedia or not? It's not like Steve will have the "be all to end all" validation if he is on one particular website. People will be able to link up to him through any search engine.

I want to add this article for the same reason I would add any article to Wikipedia - because Wikipedia is a public collection of notable information, and Steve is a notable person. It's for the benefit of Wikipedia users, not for Steve.

And I think you underestimate the significance of Wikipedia. It's not just 'one particular website' - it's probably the largest single public collection of knowledge on the internet. For any topic you plug into Google, odds are that the Wikipedia page will be in the top 2 results.