357:
page, though that cannot be known for sure. Looking back at past edits, it appears that the page has been vandalized; currently, under "alternate names," he is listed as "THE DAWG." I highly doubt that this is an actual alias. In all, the page seems to have been self-created, then neglected. Although new to the Wiki community, I feel that it gives nothing to
Knowledge, and that the likely self-spawned nature of creation is against the spirit of what Knowledge is all about.
56:. I think he is notable as WP:Author and WP:PROF, so I started rewriting it to eliminate the puffery and paraphrase, but found it too contaminated by both that and promotionalism; it will need starting over. In general, bios like this on the web are often prepared not by the faculty member but by university PR, and they are also often to blame for adding them here. A notable person deserves better
356:
Happy to help! I'm amazed at how quickly and throughly you reacted and gathered information. The part about this article that most made me flag it for deletion was the appearance of it being self serving; it is my understanding that
Knowledge is not 'Linkedin.' It is highly likely that he created the
201:
This article was most likely self-created, and offers little to no benefit to the Wiki community. The person "Daniel Smith" is not a 'notable' enough figure worth having a Wiki page for. It should also be noted that it violates many of the rules
170:
313:. Ironically, on Florida-specific political issues, he could likely be cited as a reliable academic source whose comments on given issues would likely constitute significant coverage. But that doesn't necessarily make
470:
164:
278:
448:
332:
and while he is regularly cited in newspapers, every single one of those articles is actually about other people, with some comments from him for some added "academic" substance.
125:
426:
241:
remain but he is regularly cited as an "expert" commentator on election matters, especially in
Florida. The articles, though, are not comprehensive coverage
98:
93:
262:
102:
130:
373:
85:
254:
185:
152:
225:
294:
302:
270:
17:
146:
369:
211:
142:
539:
514:
484:
462:
440:
412:
377:
351:
215:
67:
192:
310:
89:
558:
286:
40:
365:
336:
207:
81:
73:
397:
306:
158:
554:
510:
409:
348:
36:
396:
in either direction. I understand your original nomination but it might be that this one is a case of
361:
393:
298:
178:
535:
480:
458:
436:
203:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
553:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
526:- full professor at FSU, Fulbright scholar, and work outside of academia. Needs formatting
506:
495:
401:
340:
325:
232:. Doesn't give a reason or a context and I can't see where it was originally linked from.
388:
Yeah, it certainly needs work but it might be that he does (just) meet the criteria for
324:
which seems to be how the various news sources come to seek him out for comment. While
282:
258:
389:
329:
238:
63:
531:
476:
454:
432:
274:
119:
229:
53:
290:
266:
498:
to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
206:. In all, this page contributes little to nothing to the Wiki community.
58:
52:. Copyvio in part and otherwise a close paraphrase of his web site
228:
profile of Prof. Smith is hosted on the site of
Illinois Senator
547:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
321:
317:
notable as no-one has subsequently given him coverage in turn.
392:. I'd be interested to see what others think and to see if a
471:
list of
Academics and educators-related deletion discussions
237:
Questions about whether or not he is notable enough to meet
115:
111:
107:
177:
505:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
449:
list of Social science-related deletion discussions
309:. Most of those are very recent and relate to the
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
561:). No further edits should be made to this page.
427:list of Politics-related deletion discussions
191:
54:http://www.clas.ufl.edu/users/dasmith/bio.htm
8:
469:Note: This debate has been included in the
447:Note: This debate has been included in the
425:Note: This debate has been included in the
339:, you've given us something to think about!
468:
446:
424:
335:Am massively on the fence with this one.
7:
253:him making additional comments. See
24:
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
540:19:57, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
515:13:15, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
413:00:45, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
224:- First, am not sure why, but
68:00:55, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
1:
485:13:21, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
463:13:21, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
441:13:20, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
378:15:22, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
352:04:54, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
328:, that doesn't mean he meets
216:03:11, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
578:
311:2012 Presidential Election
550:Please do not modify it.
82:Daniel Smith (professor)
74:Daniel Smith (professor)
32:Please do not modify it.
307:San Francisco Chronicle
320:He runs the website
366:Flordiagatorpolisci
337:Flordiagatorpolisci
299:Wall Street Journal
208:Flordiagatorpolisci
48:The result was
517:
487:
474:
465:
452:
443:
430:
400:instead. Cheers,
381:
364:comment added by
326:he clearly exists
322:electionsmith.com
569:
552:
504:
500:
475:
453:
431:
406:
398:WP:FIXTHEPROBLEM
394:consensus builds
380:
358:
345:
196:
195:
181:
133:
123:
105:
34:
577:
576:
572:
571:
570:
568:
567:
566:
565:
559:deletion review
548:
493:
404:
359:
343:
138:
129:
96:
80:
77:
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
575:
573:
564:
563:
543:
542:
520:
519:
518:
502:
501:
490:
489:
488:
466:
444:
421:
420:
419:
418:
417:
416:
383:
382:
333:
318:
283:The News-Press
259:New York Times
234:
233:
199:
198:
135:
76:
71:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
574:
562:
560:
556:
551:
545:
544:
541:
537:
533:
529:
525:
522:
521:
516:
512:
508:
503:
499:
497:
492:
491:
486:
482:
478:
472:
467:
464:
460:
456:
450:
445:
442:
438:
434:
428:
423:
422:
414:
411:
408:
407:
399:
395:
391:
387:
386:
385:
384:
379:
375:
371:
367:
363:
355:
354:
353:
350:
347:
346:
338:
334:
331:
327:
323:
319:
316:
312:
308:
304:
300:
296:
292:
288:
284:
280:
276:
272:
268:
264:
260:
256:
252:
248:
244:
240:
236:
235:
231:
227:
223:
220:
219:
218:
217:
213:
209:
205:
194:
190:
187:
184:
180:
176:
172:
169:
166:
163:
160:
157:
154:
151:
148:
144:
141:
140:Find sources:
136:
132:
127:
121:
117:
113:
109:
104:
100:
95:
91:
87:
83:
79:
78:
75:
72:
70:
69:
65:
61:
60:
55:
51:
50:speedy delete
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
549:
546:
527:
523:
494:
402:
360:— Preceding
341:
314:
275:The Guardian
250:
246:
245:him, rather
242:
222:On the fence
221:
200:
188:
182:
174:
167:
161:
155:
149:
139:
57:
49:
47:
31:
28:
507:Mark Arsten
230:Dick Durbin
165:free images
291:The Nation
267:The Ledger
555:talk page
524:Weak keep
477:• Gene93k
455:• Gene93k
433:• Gene93k
305:from the
297:from the
257:from the
37:talk page
557:or in a
496:Relisted
403:Stalwart
374:contribs
362:unsigned
342:Stalwart
126:View log
39:or in a
532:Bearian
249:him or
171:WP refs
159:scholar
99:protect
94:history
410:(talk)
390:WP:GNG
349:(talk)
330:WP:GNG
277:(UK),
239:WP:GNG
143:Google
103:delete
528:badly
289:from
281:from
273:from
265:from
202:cited
186:JSTOR
147:books
131:Stats
120:views
112:watch
108:links
64:talk
16:<
536:talk
511:talk
481:talk
459:talk
437:talk
370:talk
303:here
301:and
295:here
287:here
279:here
271:here
263:here
255:here
251:with
226:this
212:talk
204:here
179:FENS
153:news
116:logs
90:talk
86:edit
405:111
344:111
315:him
193:TWL
128:•
124:– (
59:DGG
538:)
530:.
513:)
483:)
473:.
461:)
451:.
439:)
429:.
376:)
372:•
293:,
285:,
269:,
261:,
247:by
243:of
214:)
173:)
118:|
114:|
110:|
106:|
101:|
97:|
92:|
88:|
66:)
534:(
509:(
479:(
457:(
435:(
415:.
368:(
210:(
197:)
189:·
183:·
175:·
168:·
162:·
156:·
150:·
145:(
137:(
134:)
122:)
84:(
62:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.