173:, and has now been recreated using an abbreviation for the middle name, which is weird in itself. Does he really call himself Thomas Wm. Hamilton or was this simply an attempt to recreate a deleted article? As it stands, this article seems to be making a minor academic out to be far more important than he really is - his work looks impressive until you realise that almost all of it is of a very local nature. It also looks as if it may well be self-created, with heavy editing by another editor who has only worked on this article and articles related to it and seems to know a lot of obscure information about Mr Hamilton! --
403:) I cannot compare this version to that previously deleted via AfD so I can't say whether a speedy is justified, but re-creating a deleted bio such that the new version is virtually indistinguishable from a hoax shows the problem). None of his books generate anything like a single measly google hit. The NYT mention of his name seems like the only WP:V source to confirm anything, but he still falls far short of WP:PROF (absolutely no evidence that his work has had a notable impact on the world of ideas), and clearly fails WP:BIO (as he is certainly not the subject of extensive coverage in reliable secondary sources.
162:
had a large corpus of adult work then yes, but only as a child? He would have to have been pretty high profile. And what did he do then? He went to work for a small college, wrote a few articles, mostly for local consumption, and got involved in some local politics without a great deal of success. This does not seem to make him particularly notable, unless it can be proved that his planetarium work (covered here in a few words) makes him notable.
31:
444:, notability was barely asserted. From a closer look at current article shows many of the same problems, just better decorated. He seems to published mainly in the in-house bindings of the companies he worked for. No academic acknowledgment found, just Hamilton apparently citing himself. He is an engineer/scientist with an unremarked body of work.
161:
at all, despite claims that he appeared in films and TV series. If he only appeared in the theatre as a child actor I'm not sure that qualifies for notability - the notability bar has to be higher for stage actors since they don't reach anywhere near such a large audience as film and TV actors. If he
269:
This does look like a hoax: I have tried locating the ISBN and ISSN numbers mentioned in the article and they don't seem to exist outside of
Knowledge (XXG). If this article was deleted at AfD before, shouldn't the re-creation be a simple speedy?
324:: This is not a hoax. I happen to know this person. (I am not he and have never edited his article). And yes, he does use "Wm." as a middle name/initial. I take no position on deletion/notability as I have a COI, but see
193:
349:). The issue in the first AfD is whether his credentials added up to notability. The big problem here is COI from Hamilton himself, who re-posted the article, and a former student who tried to fix it.
219:
170:
157:
First of all, I'm a little dubious as to whether this person exists at all. His biography seems bizarre to say the least. But assuming he does, why is he notable? He doesn't appear on the
150:
328:
for proof of existence. I can't vouch the veracity of most of the article -- it would be OR if I could -- but on the other hand there's nothing in it I know to be untrue.
245:
370:
issues here but even if all the info in the article is verified I don't see it adding up to notability under any of the notability guidelines (not enough here for
40:
307:: Looks very much like a hoax. Yes, there are plenty of references, but isn't it "odd" that all of the citations are too obscure to be readily verifiable? --
117:
112:
121:
346:
104:
17:
489:
325:
471:
420:
No evidence of notability seems to be forthcoming, and Pete's analysis clearly states the problem with this article. --
65:
46:
441:
and your can take your pick of any secondary criteria, esp. WP:CREATIVE. From a mirrored version of the old article
453:
429:
412:
387:
358:
337:
316:
297:
279:
260:
234:
208:
182:
86:
470:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
284:
I'd rather it was dicussed. The previous AfD does not look to me to be particularly conclusive and the article
64:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
108:
400:
166:
396:
100:
92:
375:
333:
293:
178:
442:
408:
329:
449:
354:
256:
230:
204:
82:
58:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
425:
312:
275:
438:
371:
383:
289:
174:
404:
367:
483:
445:
350:
252:
226:
200:
78:
138:
421:
308:
271:
379:
288:
got plenty of references, although their veracity needs to be verified. --
464:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
158:
25:
194:
list of
Academics and educators-related deletion discussions
220:
list of Actors and actresses-related deletion discussions
145:
134:
130:
126:
165:
Incidentally, this article was originally created as
68:). No further edits should be made to this page.
474:). No further edits should be made to this page.
246:list of New York-related deletion discussions
8:
345:. Thomas Hamilton apparently is for real.(
244:: This debate has been included in the
218:: This debate has been included in the
192:: This debate has been included in the
45:For an explanation of the process, see
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
374:and most certainly not enough for
24:
41:deletion review on 2008 August 15
29:
47:Knowledge (XXG):Deletion review
1:
506:
454:04:56, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
87:03:20, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
430:22:14, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
413:21:42, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
388:20:41, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
359:16:36, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
338:12:45, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
317:11:59, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
298:10:32, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
280:10:22, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
261:09:10, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
235:09:10, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
209:09:10, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
183:08:26, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
490:Pages at deletion review
467:Please do not modify it.
61:Please do not modify it.
437:. Not a hoax but fails
401:Thomas William Hamilton
167:Thomas William Hamilton
366:There are still some
397:Thomas Wm. Hamilton
169:, deleted after an
101:Thomas Wm. Hamilton
93:Thomas Wm. Hamilton
73:The result was
263:
249:
237:
223:
211:
197:
53:
52:
39:was subject to a
497:
469:
250:
240:
224:
214:
198:
188:
148:
142:
124:
63:
33:
32:
26:
505:
504:
500:
499:
498:
496:
495:
494:
480:
479:
478:
472:deletion review
465:
144:
115:
99:
96:
66:deletion review
59:
37:This discussion
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
503:
501:
493:
492:
482:
481:
477:
476:
459:
457:
456:
432:
415:
390:
361:
340:
319:
302:
301:
300:
264:
238:
212:
155:
154:
95:
90:
71:
70:
54:
51:
50:
44:
34:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
502:
491:
488:
487:
485:
475:
473:
468:
462:
461:
460:
455:
451:
447:
443:
440:
436:
433:
431:
427:
423:
419:
416:
414:
410:
406:
402:
398:
394:
391:
389:
385:
381:
377:
373:
369:
365:
362:
360:
356:
352:
348:
344:
341:
339:
335:
331:
327:
323:
320:
318:
314:
310:
306:
303:
299:
295:
291:
287:
283:
282:
281:
277:
273:
268:
265:
262:
258:
254:
247:
243:
239:
236:
232:
228:
221:
217:
213:
210:
206:
202:
195:
191:
187:
186:
185:
184:
180:
176:
172:
168:
163:
160:
152:
147:
140:
136:
132:
128:
123:
119:
114:
110:
106:
102:
98:
97:
94:
91:
89:
88:
84:
80:
76:
69:
67:
62:
56:
55:
48:
42:
38:
35:
28:
27:
19:
466:
463:
458:
434:
417:
392:
363:
342:
321:
304:
285:
266:
241:
215:
189:
164:
156:
74:
72:
60:
57:
36:
376:WP:ACADEMIC
347:NYT article
395:and (salt
290:Necrothesp
175:Necrothesp
446:• Gene93k
405:Pete.Hurd
351:• Gene93k
253:• Gene93k
227:• Gene93k
201:• Gene93k
484:Category
151:View log
364:Delete.
343:Comment
322:Comment
267:Comment
118:protect
113:history
79:Rjd0060
439:WP:BIO
435:Delete
422:Crusio
418:Delete
393:delete
372:WP:BIO
330:Xcvfgh
309:Orlady
305:Delete
272:Crusio
146:delete
122:delete
75:Delete
380:Nsk92
149:) – (
139:views
131:watch
127:links
16:<
450:talk
426:talk
409:talk
399:and
384:talk
368:WP:V
355:talk
334:talk
326:here
313:talk
294:talk
276:talk
257:talk
242:Note
231:talk
216:Note
205:talk
190:Note
179:talk
159:IMDb
135:logs
109:talk
105:edit
83:talk
378:).
286:has
248:.
222:.
196:.
171:AfD
486::
452:)
428:)
411:)
386:)
357:)
336:)
315:)
296:)
278:)
270:--
259:)
233:)
207:)
181:)
137:|
133:|
129:|
125:|
120:|
116:|
111:|
107:|
85:)
77:.
43:.
448:(
424:(
407:(
382:(
353:(
332:(
311:(
292:(
274:(
255:(
251:—
229:(
225:—
203:(
199:—
177:(
153:)
143:(
141:)
103:(
81:(
49:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.