Talk:Christopher Dunn (engineer)
Latest comment: 15 years ago by Dougweller in topic Recreation of deleted article Christopher Dunn (engineer)
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
Recreation of deleted article Christopher Dunn (engineer) edit
Just to note that this author has had an article before, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christopher Dunn (engineer)dougweller (talk) 09:37, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
- Noted but I wasn't aware, sorry. But, the article now is far better. I have even referenced what he is referenced in. I would like to make this really worth while. When it comes to Giza, Dunn is ALWAYS the author referred to at some degree. AWT (talk) 17:40, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
- It still has some serious problems. All those books you say reference him, you'd need page numbers and publishers so we can make sure there are no self-published books (eg Edfu publications). I don't think that belongs anyway. Plus, very few Egyptologists care about him even if they've heard of him, and he isn't mentioned in any of my serious books. I'm not sure he meets [WP:Notable]] - depends on what is meant by peers etc I guess at WP:CREATIVE dougweller (talk) 18:36, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
- I understand about the problems but hopefully someone that appears to be seious about this will help build rather than tear down (regardless of whether or not it is deleted in the end). Amazon gives excerpts from these books with references and page numbers. It also gives the publishers for all the books. What qualifies as a 'serious book'? Just because the majority of 'academics' or 'eygpytologists' believe in another theory doesn't make his wrong. Remember, these sort of people once believed the earth was flat. What I would say to you as you have a particular interest in this, is to read his book and then comment. Edfu publications? I agree with you about the self published stuff. Sound theories are often iignored by so called 'academics' for fear of ridicule and loss of jobs and is also why some don't research and write about such things, such like Secret history. 77.96.24.33 (talk) 19:09, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
- NJGW and Dougweller, your help is greatly appreciated. Thank you. 77.96.24.33 (talk) 19:33, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
- Did you forget to sign in? It isn't our role as editors to comment on Dunn, just to report what WP:RS have said about his work (which is a bit of a problem, as I'm not sure if any of the authors would qualify as reliable sources!). dougweller (talk) 21:31, 12 January 2009 (UTC)