Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rodney Stich

:{{la|Rodney Stich}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Rodney_Stich Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|Rodney Stich}})

There appears to be a total of one reliable source that discusses this person; all others are fringe sources. Fails WP:AUTHOR and WP:BLPFRINGE. Location (talk) 10:06, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

• Delete No real evidence of notability. The sources just aren't there and the article smells like a form of soft promotion. Subject fails WP:BASIC and WP:AUTHOR. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:27, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
• Delete as it stands, though at least there's one more RS than most articles like this. It's possible it should stay, but needs the RSes added first - David Gerard (talk) 07:55, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
• Keep: Added more wp:RS, so per wp:AUTHOR, clause 1, The person... is widely cited by peers or successors.The works of the author have been cited by a best seller, and other books one published by Feral House and the other by New York University Press, in a trade magazine published by Utah Fire and Rescue Academy.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 21:05, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:57, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:57, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Conspiracy theories-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:57, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:57, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

• Delete. Fails WP:NAUTHOR, WP:GNG and WP:ANYBIO. Being cited by others does provide some evidence of notability, but he's certainly not "widely cited by peers or successors." Pburka (talk) 20:11, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
• Comment Defrauding America has been reviewed by the Conspiracy Digest, describing it as "Defrauding America by Rodney Stich is the Rosetta Stone for decoding nationwide criminal conspiracy. It's also an astonishing contribution to American history. And, without a doubt, it will be the most mind-blowing book you've ever read.".{{cite web|url=http://www.conspiracydigest.com/bookdefrauding.html|title=Book Review|last=Dowbenko|first= Uri|work=Conspiracy Digest|accessdate=2 July 2015}} More citations for Defrauding America,{{cite book|author=Gyeorgos C. Hatonn|title=Taking Off the Blindfold|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=uAxN_G8YmGMC&pg=PA97|date=April 1994|publisher=Phoenix Source Distributors, Inc.|isbn=978-1-56935-038-6|pages=97–}}{{cite book|author=Joseph P. Farrell|title=The SS Brotherhood of the Bell: NASA's Nazis, JFK, and Majic-12|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=ycsmUU0DXhIC&pg=PA392|year=2006|publisher=Adventures Unlimited Press|isbn=978-1-931882-61-3|pages=392–}}{{cite book|author=Gyeorgos C. Hatonn|title=Retirement Retreats: Or Which Concentration Camp Do You Prefer?|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=EDuwIa6VuL0C&pg=PA100|date=1 December 1993|publisher=Phoenix Source Distributors, Inc.|isbn=978-1-56935-027-0|pages=100–}}{{cite book|author=Gyeorgos C. Hatonn|title=Criminal Polit Buros and Other Plagues|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=7_Tz__eYaeYC&pg=PR2|date=1 June 1994|publisher=Phoenix Source Distributors, Inc.|isbn=978-1-56935-041-6|pages=2–}}{{cite book|author=Douglas Perez|title=Paradoxes of Police Work|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=yS0FAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA118|date=1 January 2010|publisher=Cengage Learning|isbn=1-111-79025-6|pages=118–}}{{cite news|url=http://www.globalresearch.ca/bush-administration-s-trojan-horse-gift-to-america-and-the-democrats-former-cia-director-and-iran-contra-insider-robert-gates/3784?print=1|title=Bush administration’s Trojan Horse gift to America and the Democrats: Former CIA Director and Iran-Contra insider Robert Gates|last=Chin|first=Larry|date=2006-11-09|publisher=Global Research|accessdate=2 July 2015}} Yogesh Khandke (talk) 13:11, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

:A photograph in an article written by Ken Summers, has been attributed to him.{{cite news|url=http://weekinweird.com/2014/05/20/man-without-country-mystery-man-taured/|title=Man without a Country: Who Was The Mystery Man from Taured?|last=Summers|first=Ken|date=2014-05-20|work=Week in Weird |accessdate=2 July 2015}} Yogesh Khandke (talk) 13:46, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

::I think you need to take a closer look at those sources; [http://www.phoenixarchives.com/html/information.html#hatonn Gyeorgos C. Hatonn] is my favorite. Conspiracy theorists frequently cite or give kudos to other conspiracy theorists. I do not believe he has been "widely cited", but that is irrelevant. Implicit in "widely cited by peers or successors" is the idea that those peers and successors are reliable sources themselves. We don't allow fringe sources to dictate the notability of fringe subjects. This fails WP:BLPFRINGE. - Location (talk) 13:43, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

:::I don't disagree with your fringe description, his theories may be fringe, but they are popular, and that makes him notable. Also he has been quoted by mainstream sources too, as per above. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 13:48, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

::::Taking Hatonn off per Location. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 14:08, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

:::::Are you asking me to go through these sources one by one? Well, Conspiracy Digest is the self-published work of artist [http://www.uridowbenko.com/bio/ Uri Dowbenko]. For Farrell, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseph P. Farrell. Douglas Perez's work appears to be self-published and only notes Stich in his recommend reading list (which contains other conspiracy works). Larry Chin cites other conspiracy theorists to support a version of the October Surprise conspiracy theory. Ken Summers writes for Week in Weird; this is essentially the National Enquirer. John Barry Smith's www.montereypeninsulaairport.com is self-published. And as you've noted below, Flying Magazine cites Smith, not Stich. - Location (talk) 15:43, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

::::John Barry Smith in his Rupture at Midspan Latches of Cargo Door in Flight Probably Caused by Wiring/Electrical Fault uses a photo from The Real Unfriendly Skies, Saga of Corruption,{{cite web|url=http://www.montereypeninsulaairport.com/Skiescargodoor0pict.html|title=Rupture at Midspan Latches of Cargo Door in Flight Probably Caused by Wiring/Electrical Fault|last=Smith|first=John Barry|work=montereypeninsulaairport.com|accessdate=2 July 2015}} Smith is an independent investigator who has been quoted by Flying (magazine).{{cite book|title=Flying Magazine|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=gPYeTL0rPoYC&pg=PA104|date=July 1992|pages=104–|ISSN=00154806}} Yogesh Khandke (talk) 14:49, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

::::: Smith using a photo from Stich's book is hardly a citation, and contributes little to notability. Pburka (talk) 19:38, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

:::::: Agreed one photo alone doesn't contribute to notability, but it isn't one photo alone, here is an independent investigator who uses a photo from Stich's work, how is a photo any worse than quoting text. Yes, Flying (magazine) doesn't quote Stich, it quotes Smith, so Smith is a notable investigator who cites Stich. Even when we take a couple of sources as bad, there still are seven that are kosher, as I see them. Stich has come up with fantastic theories that are taken cognisance, so what a few are National Enquirer type. His Spartacus Educational entry says he has done 2500 radio/ TV shows, internationally, which also makes him notable.{{cite news|url=http://spartacus-educational.com/JFKstich.htm|title=Rodney Stich|last=Simkin|first=John|work=Spartacus Educational|accessdate=2 July 2015}} SE isn't blacklisted, it is "use with caution" just as any other source better or worse, see this Encyclopaedia Britannica entry on Mahabaleshwar it locates it completely wrong.[http://www.britannica.com/place/Mahabaleshwar] I had written them, yet they ignored. This is a package, a conspiracy theorist, an investigator, an author, if you sum the parts, there is enough to make him notable. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 18:28, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

:::::::The claim is copied nearly verbatim from Stich's book advertisements: [http://www.defraudingamerica.com/ads_two_classic_books_dec_1997.pdf][http://www.defraudingamerica.com/ads_unprecedented_evidence_feb_1998.pdf]. - Location (talk) 18:48, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

::::::::Also Conspiracy Digest is "small but influential",Robin Ramsay (editor) mentions CD{{cite book|author=Robin Ramsay|title=Conspiracy Theories|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=58zDOvNzks8C&pg=PT37|date=3 February 2012|publisher=Oldcastle Books, Limited|isbn=978-1-84243-819-0|pages=37–}} so does Adam Gorightly{{cite book|author=Adam Gorightly|title=The Prankster and the Conspiracy: The Story of Kerry Thornley and How He Met Oswald and Inspired the Counterculture|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=tCxmamU5ZuUC&pg=PA200|year=2003|publisher=Cosimo, Inc.|isbn=978-1-61640-622-6|pages=200–}} Mark Fenster{{cite book|author=Mark Fenster|title=Conspiracy Theories: Secrecy and Power in American Culture|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=SR-mmN746KQC&pg=PA274|year=1999|publisher=U of Minnesota Press|isbn=978-0-8166-3242-8|pages=274–}} Richard M. Gilman{{cite book|author=Richard M. Gilman|title=Behind World revolution: the strange career of Nesta H. Webster|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=FyJtAAAAIAAJ|date=1 December 1982|publisher=Insights Books|isbn=978-0-910087-00-1}} Richard M. Gilman calls it Small but highly influential.{{cite book|author=Richard M. Gilman|title=Behind World revolution: the strange career of Nesta H. Webster|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=FyJtAAAAIAAJ|date=1 December 1982|publisher=Insights Books|isbn=978-0-910087-00-1}} A Orion Publishing Group book also refers to a quotation from it.{{cite book|author1=Dan Burstein|author2=Arne de Keijzer|title=Secrets Of Angels And Demons|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=5h_HMRV5RgAC&pg=PT237|date=18 November 2010|publisher=Orion|isbn=978-0-297-86490-5|pages=237–}} Yogesh Khandke (talk) 19:07, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

:::::::::The advertisements mention reviews by West Coast Review of Books, Dick Gregory, Nexus (magazine) and American Library Association Yogesh Khandke (talk) 19:17, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Comment Given the lengthy back and forth above I decided to have another look at the article and try to take in the points from the discussion. Unfortunately I still am not seeing much. Once you take out the Fringe sources the case for notability is incredibly weak. Regrettably I stand by my Delete !vote. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:18, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

{{reflist-talk}}

{{clear}}

: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.