Talk:Gay Hendricks

Proposed deletion (Feb 10)

The last proposed deletion ended with the assertion that the article COULD be improved to meet Wikipedia standards (with which I disagreed) and resulted in keep. Subsequently all unsourced statements were removed from the article (by me), leaving (essentially) no content. Since that time no one has come forward to do the work necessary to wikify the article, although it has frequently been the target of vandalism attempts. I'm therefore proposing it for deletion again; first as a speedy delete (no context) and then subsequently as a prod if that's declined. - DustFormsWords (talk) 23:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

You can't remove all the context and then nominate it as no context. While WP:BLP tells us to remove controversial or negative information that is not properly sourced, it does not say that every single word has to be properly sourced. And don't bother with the PROD either, you can't prod an article that has already survived an WP:AFD. I'm afraid the only choice left open to you is to re-nominate it for another AFD. Beeblebrox (talk) 02:42, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

From WP:BLP: "The burden of evidence for any edit on Wikipedia rests with the person who adds or restores material", "The Foundation urges that special attention be paid to neutrality and verifiability regarding living person", "Remove any unsourced material [...] which is a conjectural interpretation of the source (see Wikipedia:No original research)." But I appreciate your insight, experience and advice. I'll see if the article is improved by anyone, and if not take it back to AfD. - DustFormsWords (talk) 03:20, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Bibliography

I guess it doesnt matter that the author has published a notable book, Conscious Breathing, in 1995, with at least 7 printings, from Bantam Books, which i am holding in my hand right now. or that he has published 4 other books himself, and 4 more with his partner/wife Kathlyn Hendricks, quite a few from notable publishers. If people would spend at least as much energy adding reliably sourced material to articles as they do removing unsourced material, we might actually have an encyclopedia someday.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 02:43, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi Mercurywoodrose. As you'll recall during the last AfD people expressed considerable concern at the amount of unsourced material in the biography of a living person. I note you've reverted to an older version of the document; if you're going to do that, please ensure that every fact is referenced by a reliable citation. It doesn't matter what the content is, only whether it's referenced. Unreferenced content is effectively original research. I'm making the good faith assumption you're intending to find those references; I'll stop back in a couple of days to see how you went. - DustFormsWords (talk) 03:11, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

i didnt revert this article. i have no problem with the removal of unsourced info in the main body of this article. i have added a list of books from major trade publishers. the existence of these books, their (mostly) in print status, should stand as reliable sources. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 03:27, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Apologies, it was Beeblebrox (above) who did the revert, for sound reasons. Thank you for including the bibliography. What concerns me, though, is (a) the biographical details like "he spent the first 25 years of his life obese" and "he claimed to see auras" - these are merely factual statements if referenced but potentially defamatory if not, and (b) the notability issue - the thrust of the article is that he's notable because he's published a lot of books and DVDs, but that doesn't found notability by itself, you have to demonstrate that the books or DVDs have been discussed by other people or have had some real consequences, and the way to do that is by providing reliable independent sources discussing them (and directly claiming that notability in the article). - DustFormsWords (talk) 03:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

So remove those unsources facts. I probably will myself. I will of course attempt to find reliable sources that discuss his books and show their notability, but i submit that ANY author with a long history of nontrivial (ie christmas diet books for cats, etc) books from major trade publishers is essentially notable. Showing where he is reviewed is eventually necessary, but this list speaks for itself. Note that is credited as an executive producer of films (though i know imbd is not reliable).Mercurywoodrose (talk) 03:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Mercurywoodrose, the article looks heaps better now. Consider my concerns addressed. - DustFormsWords (talk) 04:09, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Reference [5] does not lead to anything relevant to this article. Can this be improved or removed?

Request for semi protection

Noting repeated IP vandals adding unsupported categories to this article, I've put in a request that it be semi-protected. - DustFormsWords (talk) 03:41, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Funny comment found in the article

Apparently some editor didn't know how to write a new section in the Discussion page and posted directly in the article. I removed the text from there. Here it is: "REMOVED DELETION REQUEST BECAUSE THIS ENTRY ENABLED ME TO FIND THIS AUTHOR AFTER HEARING HIS BBC INTERVIEW (David Elliott Lewis, Ph.D.) I do not know this author but want to know more about him David was unable to add this note to the discussion page as it was not editable. Any advice?"

I don't know who was the author and at the moment I don't have the time to look for it. --Dia^ (talk) 18:55, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Gay Hendricks. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091031100418/http://www.liberation2010.com/speakers/gay.html to http://www.liberation2010.com/speakers/gay.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100130092432/http://www.amsa.org/healingthehealer/breathing.cfm to http://www.amsa.org/healingthehealer/breathing.cfm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:25, 26 December 2017 (UTC)