930:. There's the word "columnist" in passing, and I have a link to something somewhere, but I have neglected to show as well as just tell. My articles are where I've put a lot of my work. I consider my articles to be at least as important as my books— but in this WP entry on me, as I've make the mistake of letting it stand, you can blink and miss it that they exist at all. I consider my work with the articles as well as with the modules to be parts of a greater coherent work toward demonstrating kinds of natural language processing, and providing tools enabling it. E.g., Locale::Maketext isn't yet another templating system, it's the basis for i18n of entire applications, like
664:#3: "multiple independent reviews" of a "well-known work". But would need more sources like that to meet the "multiple" criteria and to show it is a "well-known work". Other paths to notability might include CREATIVE #2 for the CPAN modules, if there are independent sources that can show they are "significant" in some way. For example, the modules are included with a core Perl library distribution that is widely used might be one argument (supported with independent reliable sources). --
679:
count for something, but I'm unclear on this.. I plan to put in links to several selected Perl
Journal articles-- there's coherence to them in that about half of them are about linguistics, text processing, NLP, etc; and that many are collected in the three volume "Best of the Perl Journal". Also, would it help if I linked to a review or two of the lexicography textbook that I appear in? I never know what's good to add vs just digs me deeper into the hole. —
624:
are, if not required, then very helpful in establishing notability. Are there any interviews with Sean Burke or any articles about him in particular? Are there any reviews of his books by journalists or impartial sources, establishing notability for his books? What about independent articles on any of his CPAN modules? I did a quick search, but there are too many Sean Burkes in the world for me to easily sift through the results.
938:; Sort::ArbBiLex isn't just some little do-dad like the amortization module I wrote one afternoon, it's something crucial to localization, the theme of half my articles. I'll go put in some article links now, to make clear what has been, so far, nigh upon invisible in the article— to the result of this to-date resounding bafflement over why two books and a few modules have been claimed as be grounds for notability. —
224:
960:, this discussion is not focused on what you have written, but what has been written about you in independent reliable sources. What we're really after is coverage of you (or your works) in the press or in books; independent book reviews; and awards (for either you or you works); and similar. Note that these don't have to be in digital form.
715:
wish they'd chosen better example cases. But as they say, "perfect is the enemy of done"); and I'll add citations to those sources in, say, the next twelve hours from me hitting Enter here. (I've got other kinds of sources— for crossing that bridge if we come to it, i.e., to establish further notability if deemed necessary.) —
1014:
Thank you, Dandv! But at this point, at least as I understand this all: in the complex metarules where these things are reckoned, they need to see you *already having said that*. Everyone, go write an article about me... in the past. I'll be having giving interviews. Hurry, man, before it's still
804:
As far as
Knowledge culture is concerned, source quality is more important than the medium; online book reviews can count. Arranging an interview for the purpose of saving a Knowledge article seems a bit backwards and would be a COI. But if a journalist/news site comes asking you for an interview and
699:
source. All the other sources are primary sources (by Sean Burke) and thus can't be used in determining notability. So basically we have third-party evidence that Burke "specified the Pod format", and that Burke wrote a definitive "RTF reference guide". Any book reviews written independently of Burke
623:
Comparing this article to articles of other notable people in the Perl world, one reason for lack of sources is that sburke's books and CPAN modules are not listed in the sources sections. But the books and CPAN modules by themselves don't establish notability in
Knowledge culture. Secondary sources
473:
The reason I have essentially no interest in contributing to
Knowledge and haven't for years? People like you, and comments like the one you just made. Write your own damn shallow articles and live in your own damn supercilious, self-centered, templated universe. Or else stop acting like you own the
714:
I'm getting the gist of this now. OK, I have other third-party books that discuss modules I've written and published (…and I wasn't an author of the book, and in fact, my modules' appearances in the books were surprises that I stumbled upon *while reading the book*… pleasant surprises, although I
1071:
In the meantime, I'll be ~sourcing~ myself... But seriously, I'm actually finding some interesting stuff. Medical records formatting software using nuggets of my RTF,... people I never knew about using Locale::Maketext,... so APPARENTLY I ACTUALLY AM TAKING THIS PROCESS VERY EXTREMELY SERIOUSLY.
678:
Thank you!, now I've got kind of an idea for what direction to go in. Can you have a look now and let me know if I'm getting warmer or colder? I think the fact that there's a whole chapter in a secondary book that says that I'm the guy who specified the language that the chapter is about, might
1039:
familiarity with, basically can't remember the past ten years of his life, where he's been sorta "of no fixed address". He goes into rehab, where they wean him off the big bad drugs by giving him other drugs. And toward the end, the reveal: «: “I’m almost out of medication.” “That’s all been
782:. (And I don't mean blurbs like an Amazon description or something.) Same question for interviews online: "Are there any interviews with Sean Burke or any articles about him in particular?" Well, one or two Perl.com dudes have been saying that I should do an interview there was like with
777:
You (@Mark viking) asked: "Are there any reviews of his books by journalists or impartial sources, establishing notability for his books?" Do online reviews count? Or does it have to be in print? Reason I ask is: there's a decent number of online reviews of
168:
442:
ethical guidelines. This AfD is not a vote, arguments need to be backed up by 1. Rules and 2. Sources. As is, the article has no sources, and the two Keep votes are not based in any of
Notability rules (see
340:
Burke is a published mainstream technical author and prolific contributor of open-source Perl modules. He is prominent in the Perl community and has been consistently so for well over a decade.
693:
The source "foy, brian d (2007)" is excellent because it is independent of the subject (ie. a source not written by Sean Burke) and it shows Burke did something of significance. So is the
826:(2001), but now that I've unearthed my copy, there's just a big paragraph of me simply going on about record boundaries as optimization points. Tossing that in the wood chipper.
231:
121:
1040:
placebos for the past three months.” Milgrim slid his hand inside his jacket, to touch the almost-empty bubble-pack. No more tiny purple notations of date and time. “But I
640:
Ah, it hadn't occurred to me that the external links should appear, or even could appear, as references/sources. Let me shuffle that around and see how that shapes up. —
997:
I've been active in the Perl community since 2001, and Burke has been prominent ever since. In addition, he's a published author in technical and linguistic fields. --
162:
358:
1052:
say that "he's an excellent author who's quite famous— among authors."… but actually he's getting more of an audience now. But, sshh, I must not say his name, or
378:
52:. Though still a borderline case, I'm satisfied with the additional sources provided to show the notability of the subject re the general notability guideline.
401:
Burke is both a substantial and long-time contributor to the Perl community, and a noted researcher in the field of Native
American languages.
128:
852:, alas. When this article was started, being the author of a technical book was considered enough to be notable. The consensus has changed.
602:
You are definitely allowed to participate in this discussion. Conflict of interest restrictions don't apply to discussions about articles.
660:) to give a sense of the type of independent sources needed to establish Knowledge notability. In this case, it would be in support of
805:
the consensus here is that the source of the interview is reliable/reputable and objective, it will likely count toward notability.
240:
94:
89:
270:
98:
17:
81:
183:
150:
256:
208:
57:
229:
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
1152:
40:
737:
705:
669:
511:
464:
144:
506:
Thanks, Qworty. It was evidently a mistake to address anyone directly so I have striken that part of it. --
1133:
1109:
1081:
1005:
983:
969:
965:
947:
918:
893:
861:
857:
843:
814:
799:
768:
741:
724:
709:
688:
673:
649:
633:
611:
593:
572:
550:
515:
501:
483:
468:
410:
390:
370:
349:
302:
214:
140:
63:
1148:
1020:
810:
629:
607:
568:
36:
909:. Editing a dictionary does not get through #3, and I don't see that he meets any of the other points.
492:. There's no reason to abuse another editor in this fashion and if you keep it up you may be blocked.
755:
695:
656:
479:
345:
286:
260:
190:
1044:
a placebo,” he said to himself.» I don't think I'm like Migrim,... but if I were, I would probably
733:
701:
665:
507:
460:
245:
176:
199:
Questionable notability. Doesn't meet any of the specific notability guidelines and the claim for
912:
661:
448:
406:
292:
223:
85:
1058:
As for me, my plans for the future involve making up some t-shirts at Café Press saying “But I
1035:. ALSO: In the book, there's an academic named Milgrim who, because of sad drugs that I have
961:
853:
386:
366:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
1147:
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
1093:
1077:
979:
943:
906:
871:
839:
806:
795:
764:
720:
684:
645:
625:
603:
589:
564:
546:
538:
530:
497:
439:
934:, with my goal in having written Locale::Maketext being to solve problems that encumber in
156:
931:
560:
489:
475:
341:
1130:
1104:
884:
1032:
957:
444:
431:
402:
200:
77:
69:
1027:
729:
534:
382:
362:
320:
308:
276:
1053:
115:
255:
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to
1073:
975:
939:
835:
791:
760:
716:
680:
641:
585:
542:
493:
419:
1016:
999:
926:- I have been entirely derelict in not having shown my work in having written
787:
1096:
to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
874:
to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
783:
1048:. Similarly or at least isomorphically, I know a writer about whom I can
974:
That's in the works, too. One (or three or four) things at a time here. —
935:
822:
Well dangit. I could have sworn there was a back-and-forth with me in
559:
Meat puppets? Please avoid ad hominem attacks and keep this discussion
759:
is to an article about general scientific computing. On purpose? —
1141:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
1025:
I like the coincidence that I've just now just finished reading
218:
584:
Am I allowed to take part in this discussion on this page? —
249:(agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments,
819:
That makes good sense. Thank you, this is helping me out.
455:
to save the article recommend producing multiple reliable
1045:
423:
111:
107:
103:
175:
1103:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
881:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
790:. What's everyone's advice? Suggestions, anyone? —
1033:a brand of clothing that's famous for being secret
700:about Burke (or his book) would be usable too. --
541:. Keep votes appear to be from his meat puppets.
1056:might whammy him with the Stark Broom Of Removal.
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1155:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1062:a placebo”. But for the moment, it's a secret—
1015:time! But... gnkh,... dammit, I can't get my
359:list of Computing-related deletion discussions
459:sources that discuss Sean Burke in-depth. --
269:Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected
239:among Knowledge contributors. Knowledge has
189:
8:
379:list of Authors-related deletion discussions
377:Note: This debate has been included in the
357:Note: This debate has been included in the
422:(Sean W. Burke) as evidenced by admission
376:
356:
243:regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
263:on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.
7:
537:. Strictly promotional article per
418:- The article was self-created by
24:
222:
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1121:Notability established by new
1:
1134:05:51, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
1110:00:16, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
1082:20:48, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
1006:00:11, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
984:22:38, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
970:22:34, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
948:22:09, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
919:18:56, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
894:18:46, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
862:05:13, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
844:19:26, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
815:19:04, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
800:16:35, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
769:17:25, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
742:09:10, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
725:02:55, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
710:19:24, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
689:13:17, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
674:05:07, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
650:02:28, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
634:18:02, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
612:15:50, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
594:12:33, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
573:00:23, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
551:05:49, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
529:Non-notable writer who fails
516:10:10, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
502:07:21, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
484:06:59, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
469:01:25, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
259:on the part of others and to
64:10:47, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
411:21:25, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
391:16:19, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
371:16:19, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
350:20:17, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
215:12:37, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
654:I added a reliable source (
1172:
1046:have forgotten having been
488:Please keep your comments
753:By the way, your link to
436:Associates of Sean Burke,
1144:Please do not modify it.
434:(Conflict of Interest).
32:Please do not modify it.
438:please be aware of the
301:; accounts blocked for
271:single-purpose accounts
241:policies and guidelines
956:Unfortunately, as per
905:Subject does not meet
533:and whose work fails
1123:Scientific Computing
756:Scientific Computing
696:Scientific Computing
657:Scientific Computing
203:is tenuous at best.
1019:-based teleport to
430:please be aware of
253:by counting votes.
232:not a majority vote
1064:Don't tell anyone.
201:general notability
48:The result was
1112:
1031:, which contains
896:
892:
393:
373:
334:
333:
330:
257:assume good faith
1163:
1146:
1107:
1102:
1098:
1066:Wait,... no,...
1004:
1002:
917:
915:
891:
889:
882:
880:
876:
784:Ilya Zakherovich
328:
316:
300:
284:
265:
235:, but instead a
226:
219:
211:
205:CharlieEchoTango
194:
193:
179:
131:
119:
101:
60:
54:CharlieEchoTango
34:
1171:
1170:
1166:
1165:
1164:
1162:
1161:
1160:
1159:
1153:deletion review
1142:
1105:
1091:
1074:sburke@cpan.org
1068:Go tell anyone!
1000:
998:
976:sburke@cpan.org
940:sburke@cpan.org
932:Request Tracker
913:
910:
885:
883:
869:
836:sburke@cpan.org
792:sburke@cpan.org
761:sburke@cpan.org
717:sburke@cpan.org
681:sburke@cpan.org
642:sburke@cpan.org
586:sburke@cpan.org
318:
306:
290:
274:
261:sign your posts
209:
136:
127:
92:
76:
73:
58:
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1169:
1167:
1158:
1157:
1137:
1136:
1127:Mastering Perl
1115:
1114:
1113:
1100:
1099:
1088:
1087:
1086:
1085:
1084:
1070:
1057:
1024:
1009:
1008:
991:
990:
989:
988:
987:
986:
951:
950:
921:
899:
898:
897:
878:
877:
866:
865:
864:
832:
831:
830:
829:
828:
827:
820:
780:Perl & LWP
775:
774:
773:
772:
771:
751:
750:
749:
748:
747:
746:
745:
734:Green Cardamom
702:Green Cardamom
666:Green Cardamom
637:
636:
617:
616:
615:
614:
597:
596:
578:
577:
576:
575:
554:
553:
524:
523:
522:
521:
520:
519:
518:
508:Green Cardamom
461:Green Cardamom
413:
395:
394:
374:
353:
352:
332:
331:
227:
197:
196:
133:
72:
67:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1168:
1156:
1154:
1150:
1145:
1139:
1138:
1135:
1132:
1128:
1124:
1120:
1117:
1116:
1111:
1108:
1101:
1097:
1095:
1090:
1089:
1083:
1079:
1075:
1069:
1065:
1061:
1055:
1051:
1047:
1043:
1038:
1034:
1030:
1029:
1022:
1018:
1013:
1012:
1011:
1010:
1007:
1003:
996:
993:
992:
985:
981:
977:
973:
972:
971:
967:
963:
959:
955:
954:
953:
952:
949:
945:
941:
937:
933:
929:
925:
922:
920:
916:
914:FreeRangeFrog
908:
904:
901:
900:
895:
890:
888:
879:
875:
873:
868:
867:
863:
859:
855:
851:
848:
847:
846:
845:
841:
837:
825:
824:Perl Debugged
821:
818:
817:
816:
812:
808:
803:
802:
801:
797:
793:
789:
788:Damian Conway
785:
781:
776:
770:
766:
762:
758:
757:
752:
743:
739:
735:
731:
728:
727:
726:
722:
718:
713:
712:
711:
707:
703:
698:
697:
692:
691:
690:
686:
682:
677:
676:
675:
671:
667:
663:
659:
658:
653:
652:
651:
647:
643:
639:
638:
635:
631:
627:
622:
619:
618:
613:
609:
605:
601:
600:
599:
598:
595:
591:
587:
583:
580:
579:
574:
570:
566:
562:
558:
557:
556:
555:
552:
548:
544:
540:
536:
532:
528:
525:
517:
513:
509:
505:
504:
503:
499:
495:
491:
487:
486:
485:
481:
477:
476:Joseph N Hall
472:
471:
470:
466:
462:
458:
454:
450:
446:
441:
437:
433:
429:
425:
421:
417:
414:
412:
408:
404:
403:Schuyler Erle
400:
397:
396:
392:
388:
384:
380:
375:
372:
368:
364:
360:
355:
354:
351:
347:
343:
342:Joseph N Hall
339:
336:
335:
326:
322:
314:
310:
304:
298:
294:
288:
282:
278:
272:
268:
264:
262:
258:
252:
248:
247:
242:
238:
234:
233:
228:
225:
221:
220:
217:
216:
212:
206:
202:
192:
188:
185:
182:
178:
174:
170:
167:
164:
161:
158:
155:
152:
149:
146:
142:
139:
138:Find sources:
134:
130:
126:
123:
117:
113:
109:
105:
100:
96:
91:
87:
83:
79:
78:Sean M. Burke
75:
74:
71:
70:Sean M. Burke
68:
66:
65:
61:
55:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
1143:
1140:
1126:
1122:
1118:
1092:
1067:
1063:
1059:
1049:
1041:
1036:
1028:Zero History
1026:
994:
962:Stuartyeates
927:
923:
902:
886:
870:
854:Stuartyeates
849:
833:
823:
779:
754:
694:
655:
620:
581:
526:
456:
452:
435:
427:
415:
398:
337:
324:
312:
303:sockpuppetry
296:
285:; suspected
280:
266:
254:
250:
244:
236:
230:
204:
198:
186:
180:
172:
165:
159:
153:
147:
137:
124:
53:
49:
47:
31:
28:
1072:READY GO. —
807:Mark viking
662:WP:CREATIVE
626:Mark viking
604:Mark viking
565:Mark viking
453:If you wish
449:WP:CREATIVE
428:Sean Burke:
420:User:Sburke
163:free images
1054:Wikipe-tan
1021:work right
887:Sandstein
237:discussion
1149:talk page
907:WP:AUTHOR
539:WP:ADVERT
531:WP:AUTHOR
457:secondary
440:WP:CANVAS
383:• Gene93k
363:• Gene93k
293:canvassed
287:canvassed
246:consensus
50:Withdrawn
37:talk page
1151:or in a
1129:refs. -—
1106:Vacation
1094:Relisted
928:articles
872:Relisted
582:Question
561:WP:CIVIL
490:WP:CIVIL
325:username
319:{{subst:
313:username
307:{{subst:
297:username
291:{{subst:
281:username
275:{{subst:
122:View log
39:or in a
936:gettext
924:Comment
621:Comment
527:Delete.
474:place.
416:Comment
289:users:
210:contact
169:WPÂ refs
157:scholar
95:protect
90:history
59:contact
1050:almost
958:WP:GNG
903:Delete
850:Delete
543:Qworty
494:Qworty
445:WP:GNG
432:WP:COI
141:Google
99:delete
1001:Dandv
730:WP:42
535:WP:BK
267:Note:
184:JSTOR
145:books
129:Stats
116:views
108:watch
104:links
16:<
1131:Kvng
1125:and
1119:Keep
1078:talk
1060:like
1042:like
1037:some
995:Keep
980:talk
966:talk
944:talk
858:talk
840:talk
811:talk
796:talk
786:and
765:talk
738:talk
721:talk
706:talk
685:talk
670:talk
646:talk
630:talk
608:talk
590:talk
569:talk
547:talk
512:talk
498:talk
480:talk
465:talk
447:and
424:here
407:talk
399:Keep
387:talk
367:talk
346:talk
338:Keep
177:FENS
151:news
112:logs
86:talk
82:edit
1017:scp
732:--(
451:).
321:csp
317:or
309:csm
277:spa
251:not
191:TWL
120:– (
1080:)
982:)
968:)
946:)
860:)
842:)
813:)
798:)
767:)
740:)
723:)
708:)
687:)
672:)
648:)
632:)
610:)
592:)
571:)
549:)
514:)
500:)
482:)
467:)
426:.
409:)
389:)
381:.
369:)
361:.
348:)
327:}}
315:}}
305::
299:}}
283:}}
273::
213:)
171:)
114:|
110:|
106:|
102:|
97:|
93:|
88:|
84:|
62:)
1076:(
1023:.
978:(
964:(
942:(
911:§
856:(
838:(
834:—
809:(
794:(
763:(
744:)
736:(
719:(
704:(
683:(
668:(
644:(
628:(
606:(
588:(
567:(
563:.
545:(
510:(
496:(
478:(
463:(
405:(
385:(
365:(
344:(
329:.
323:|
311:|
295:|
279:|
207:(
195:)
187:·
181:·
173:·
166:·
160:·
154:·
148:·
143:(
135:(
132:)
125:·
118:)
80:(
56:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.