Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vince Palamara

< Wikipedia:Articles for deletion

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Mojowibble (talk | contribs) at 16:47, 19 August 2008 (→Vince Palamara). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Vince Palamara

Vince Palamara (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Exceptionally overwrought biography of a non-notable author/researcher, which appears to have been largely if not entirely written by the subject himself. He does not seem to have actually written and published any books of his own (one is "being published") and he apparently played in some non-notable rock bands. Nearly all of of the text is unverifiable through reliable sources, and the references section is a lengthy compendium of lists of books written by other people (which may or may not mention him), names, and citations to fringe sites, blogs, YouTube, etc. Delete. --MCB (talk) 06:43, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete With the exception of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette article, the subject lacks third-party coverage. Even if claims that other authors were referring to him when they talked about "a Secret Service expert" were verified, that wouldn't be enough to confer notability. Movingboxes (talk) 06:49, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete A Google search for his name turns up primarily self-promotional material. While he claims to be an expert, there is precious little that turns up proving that he is referenced by others as an expert. As he appears to be one of the only - perhaps the only - person who contributed content to his article, it doesn't appear that he is even notable in the JFK conspiracy community. --Mr. Vernon (talk) 07:24, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. He is an author of some minor note in the conspiracy community, so this could go either way, but I'd say his constant efforts to use his article as a self-promotional device and reverting edits by others as "unauthorized" is enough to push it to delete for me. Gamaliel (talk) 16:18, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DO NOT DELETE The text is very much verifiable: if one has two eyes (or even one) and access to either the internet, a library/ bookstore, or both, it is extremely easy for anyone in the world to verify all my numerous claims and references; nothing but the facts contained herein. THIS ENTRY HAS EXISTED FOR ALMOST TWO YEARS IN ITS PRESENT FORM AND ALMOST ***TEN*** YEARS IN ITS ENTIRETY (IT WAS ORIGINALLY A WRITER'S "SNUB" [SMALL ENTRY]. I make zero money from my research, so what am I gaining by alleged "self promotion"? I AM in over 45 other author's books (often times mentioning my UNIQUE qualifications as a Secret Service authority), including a GOVERNMENT REPORT (The Final Report of the ARRB) and "The Secret Service: The Hidden History Of An Enigmatic Agency" by Prof. Philip Melanson. Vincent Bugliosi states that i am a Secret Service expert in his 2008 book "Four Days In November" and I was on THE HISTORY CHANNEL four times (including VHS/ DVD; still shown in the UK and YouTube), in newspapers, radio, nationwide lectures, YouTube, all over the internet, print articles, and countless journal articles; that's the facts. As the (or at least "a") civilian Secret Service expert, what more credentials does one need??? I mean, at the VERY least, don't do something as drastic as deleting this entry (which is very popular for search engine hits and inquiries), but take it down to its original form as follows, if need be (!): "Vince Palamara is a civilian authority on the United States Secret Service, especially with regards to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Palamara's work has appeared in over 45 books by other authors, numerous articles, countless internet articles, radio, and The History Channel." Vince Palamara, a.k.a. vincebethel 8/16/08 4:39 p.m. EST —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vincebethel (talk • contribs) 20:39, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: the first revision of this article is four years old, not ten. Zetawoof(ζ) 07:59, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

incorrect criticisms of Vince Palamara entry The original edition of this article originated from person (s) unknown, NOT by Vince Palamara, back in 1998-1999, and read as follows: ""Vince Palamara is a civilian authority on the United States Secret Service, especially with regards to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Palamara's work has appeared in over [45; 32 back then] books by other authors, numerous articles, countless internet articles, radio, and The History Channel."Vincebethel (talk) 10:36, 17 August 2008 (UTC) vince palamara[reply]

Further note: According to some edit summaries User:Vincebethel is the subject of this article himself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gunnar Hendrich (talk • contribs) 09:05, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

suggestion for revision to make everyone happy Bring the areticle back to its original form: ""Vince Palamara is a civilian authority on the United States Secret Service, especially with regards to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Palamara's work has appeared in over 45 books by other authors, numerous articles, countless internet articles, radio, and The History Channel."Vincebethel (talk) 10:36, 17 August 2008 (UTC) important note of self-editing To make the entry factually correct, updated information needed to be inserted AND ALSO THE NEED AROSE TO REMOVE INCORRECT ADDITIONS BY PERSON (S) UNKNOWN. Isn't the whole purpose of Wikipedia to be factually correct? The entry IS factually correct. Again, if need be, just replace the current version with the original entry: ""Vince Palamara is a civilian authority on the United States Secret Service, especially with regards to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Palamara's work has appeared in over 45 books by other authors, numerous articles, countless internet articles, radio, and The History Channel."Vincebethel (talk) 10:38, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CommentWP:COI outlines courses of action for subjects who feel that their article is incorrect that do not involve becoming involved in editing their own article. You could have used the talk page to discuss the proposed edits with other editors and see if they agreed that the changes were a good idea. Your edits went beyond correcting factual inaccuracies and your edit summaries accused "unauthorized" editors of making changes. Per Wikipedia policies, you don't own the article just because you're the subject. You don't have to "know" the people who are editing the article for the edits to be acceptable. What is up for discussion is the notability of an article about the subject itself and the verifiability of any information that such an article might contain. In my opinion, your proposed revisions don't solve the problem--the subject isn't notable just because his opinions have appeared in works by others. The subject doesn't meet WP:BIO. Movingboxes (talk) 11:10, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PERFECT WAY TO RESOLVE THIS WHOLE MATTER: VERY SIMPLE Since someone NOT Vince Palamara originally wrote the following, and it was up for a number of years with no problems whatsoever, why not simply delete the current entry AND replace with the following as originally written (and, as such, was acceptable under Wikipedia standards): "Vince Palamara is a civilian authority on the United States Secret Service, especially with regards to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Palamara's work has appeared in over 45 books by other authors, numerous articles, countless internet articles, radio, and The History Channel." Vincebethel (talk) 12:05, 17 August 2008 (UTC) alsoVince Palamara wrote two entire chapters in the best-selling book "Murder In Dealey Plaza" (2000), edited by Prof. James Fetzer, which was subsequently favorably reviewed by Publisher's Weekly, mentioning, by name, Vince Palamara himself. In addition, Vince Palamara appeared on the History Channel 4 times in 2003 (as a "Secret Service expert"). Finally, Palamara is noted in an official government report, "The Final Report of the Assassination Records Review Board." These facts alone merit the entry's inclusion, at least in its ORIGINAL (short) format: "Vince Palamara is a civilian authority on the United States Secret Service, especially with regards to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Palamara's work has appeared in over 45 books by other authors, numerous articles, countless internet articles, radio, and The History Channel." Vincebethel (talk) 12:09, 17 August 2008 (UTC) update-importantI had a total of eight different people look at the entry in dispute and they AGREE that it is indeed "overwrought". However, they all unanimously agreed that my original entry (NOT written by me)is fine and should REPLACE the current entry: "Vince Palamara is a civilian authority on the United States Secret Service, especially with regards to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Palamara's work has appeared in over 45 books by other authors, numerous articles, countless internet articles, radio, and The History Channel." Also, I am a published author many times over: in addition to my two whole chapters in a major over the counter best-selling book favorably reviewed by Publisher's Weekly (that also mentions my name), "Murder In Dealey Plaza", Edited by Prof. James Fetzer, I have had many articles published in leading research journals (see footnotes of original entry in dispute; overwrought or not, the facts are the facts). So, once again so it sinks in, DELETE the current entry but also REPLACE it with the aforementioned short substitution (this was originally entitled a Writer's Snub: I guess myself and others made the "mistake" of adding to it; never again for me; too much hassle from editors on here LOL)Vincebethel (talk) 18:53, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak delete. I'm unsure of the genuine notability of this extremely fringe character; the sources seem generally unreliable, but it is possible others could be found. However, there is a clear conflict of interest and the bulk of the article would have to be excised anyway. As a side note, the subject needs to realise that they should not excessively contribute to their own AfD. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 01:09, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Key issue for me is the lack of reliable third-party sources about this person: mentions-in-passing don't count much toward notability, especially as the conspiracy-theory circuit seems to be a small walled garden where the same names keep getting circulated. Gordonofcartoon (talk) 11:46, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DON'T DELETE As an informed observer, I think it is pretty petty, at this juncture, to remove this entry in its entirety; after all, the entry has been up for many a year. What's the problem? Fame and notability are all relative: there are many, many people listed on Wikipedia I haven't a clue as to who they are, etc. I concede that Mr. Palamara has a huge ego, and he shouldn't have added to his entry, but that, in and of itself, is not enough to justify removal. I believe that the current abridged entry is more than fair. And, if this is a contest, I can come up with a slew of persons to counter the delete bandwagon. Dave Jenkins, a fan of the man, not his egoDavejz (talk) 21:14, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


DON'T DELETE PART DUEX Mr. Palamara is a published author and has two online books, to boot; Mr. Palamara was featured on the program "The Men Who Killed Kennedy" in 2003 on The History Channel and BBC (UK); Mr. Palamara contributed to a slew of books, most notably, as he notes above, two entire lengthy chapters in Prof. James Fetzer's 2000 tome "Murder In Dealey Plaza". In sum, Mr. Palamara is very well known, indeed: between the books, radio, television, journal articles, internet articles, etc., he has been seen and heard by literally millions. Dave Jenkins, a fan of the man, not his egoDavejz (talk) 21:18, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DON'T DELETE Do the editors of Wikipedia even CHECK the sources??? Mr. Palamara is noted prominently in many third-party sources: books, radio programs, and the aforementioned tv program. Just go on Amazon or check the links. I know it takes work but the evidence is overwhelming. Dave Jenkins, a fan of the man, not his egoDavejz (talk) 21:20, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


ALSO At the risk of sounding like a shill for the man, do Vince Bugliosi (author of FOUR DAYS IN NOVEMBER), former Secret Service agent Abraham Bolden, and the late and esteemed Professor Philip Melanson (author of THE SECRET SERVICE) count as reliable third party sources? Because, if they do (and they do), they all quote from and endorse Mr. Palamara.Davejz (talk) 21:24, 18 August 2008 (UTC) — Davejz (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Comment At the risk of pointing out the incredibly, painfully obvious, Davejz's only edits have been to Vince Palamara (removing the AfD template) and this AfD discussion. Movingboxes (talk) 21:27, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'd also note that Davejz made changes to the article that Vince himself was proposing to make. A coincidence, I'm sure. --Mr. Vernon (talk) 01:58, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

incorrect Baseball Player Jerry Reuss, more to followDavejz (talk) 22:43, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment That was done after I made my comment, so it was correct at the time it was made. Movingboxes (talk) 01:12, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Davejz, also note the template at the top of the page. Astroturfing doesn't work here. Gordonofcartoon (talk) 22:32, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

popularity of entry/ years online I guess I just cannot comprehend Wikipedia. If this entry was here for several years and had alot of internet traffic, why pull the plug now (throwing the baby out with the bathwater)? Mr. Palamara has it right above: short and sweet. Commence sarcastic editor comments now ;-) Davejz (talk) 22:43, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Amazon shows a book by Vince Palamara, The Third Alternative (spiral bound), dated to 1993, self-published and currently unavailable. (The book lacks an ISBN). That book has one single review by an Amazon customer, awarding it five stars. Curiously enough the favorable review is written by Vince Palamara. I join the editors above who argue that the case for notability has not been made. EdJohnston (talk) 02:44, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak delete. Disregarding the self-promotion, sources seem weak or unreliable. Stronger sources need to be cited (and listed in a more standard, readable format) as in the articles for James_H._Fetzer, Philip_Melanson, Vincent_Bugliosi (these articles are referenced in the Palamara article). As it stands I don't think notability has yet been established. As Gordonofcartoon says, "mentions-in-passing don't count much toward notability". Can any other (notable) sources be provided (eg. newspaper, magazine articles, reliable websites)? I'll have to see if I can find the History Channel footage, but I am unsure if that in itself would prove notability, just that the person in question was on TV. More sources? Mojowibble (talk) 16:47, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Vince_Palamara&oldid=232933694"