User talk:Kwarnimo

Speedy deletion of Stan V. Smith, Ph.D

A tag has been placed on Stan V. Smith, Ph.D requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 18:32, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

The concept of writing an article "for client who wants to have article written on Wikipedia" (quoted from your edit summary) very much goes against the most basic principles of Wikipedia. This act implies that you are promoting the subject. Promoting anything on Wikipedia is against our policies. You have a conflict of interest because you cannot accurately judge whether or not a subject is notable when you are working for the subject himself. Writing a Wikipedia article about a subject on behalf of that subject is very, very wrong. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 18:38, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Response / Clarification

So if he wants an article on here, a neutral economist would be the best choice to write it? I'm not trying to promote him one way or another -- I just handle technical work for him and he wanted a page created. It sounds like from your conflict of interest statements, though, that he couldn't ask anybody to write a page for him since it would create a conflict of interest, right?

Kwarnimo (talk) 18:43, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Exactly! Moreover, Dr. Smith seems to have a history of self-promotion on Wikipedia. He wrote most of the article on Hedonic damages and cited only himself as the sole source. I don't think that would fly in academic circles, and it won't here either. A neutral party would need to write this instead. He may well be notable enough for an article, but a neutral party needs to be the judge of that. The fact that two previous articles about him (he wrote at least one himself) is an indicator of self-promotion as well. I've warned him about it on his own user talk page. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 19:00, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I think I understand now. I know he has written these articles before, and understandably so. He has made notable contributions, but I don't think he caught the point about it being from a neutral point of view. I will let Stan know this -- in the meantime, I can kill the Stan V. Smith PhD page no problem, but can the Hedonic Damages page stay? It hasn't had any other complaints lately aside from your point about conflict of interest Kwarnimo (talk) 19:22, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Even though he wrote the article, I think the principle of hedonic damages is easily notable enough on it own to stay. I did a Google search on it and quite a few relevant sources came up, aside from those on Dr. Smith's web site. It needs some attention from a neutral party, though. I haven't marked that article for deletion, but did post some warning mesages about COI and lack of sources other than those directly from Dr. Smith. But self-promotion on Wikipedia is highly frowned upon, and some of my more zealous editor colleagues take great glee in taking down anyome who tries to promote themselves on Wikipedia. It's sometimes a cat-and-mouse game involving some of the more blatant self-promoters, as they attempt to use various means to get their promotional material on Wikipedia. Unfortunately, one of those methods involves hiring others to write such articles — which is why your article raised a red flag. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 19:32, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Stan V. Smith, Ph.D

I have nominated Stan V. Smith, Ph.D, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stan V. Smith, Ph.D. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 19:38, 17 January 2008 (UTC)