 | This article was nominated for deletion on 16 August 2010 (UTC). The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
| This article was nominated for deletion on 16 January 2014. The result of the discussion was keep. |
 | A fact from Robert Slade appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 26 May 2008, and was viewed approximately 455 times (disclaimer) (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
 | The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.
|
| 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 article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
How does one recommend deletion? edit
I am recomending deletion of this article for the following reasons 1. Many of the sources are the subjects own material. Such as references 1 through 5, 7,9, and 24. 2. From what I can tell this subjects only real claim to fame is doing a number of book reviews and doing some work on some early Usenet newsgroup faqs. Is that really notable? 3. There are numerous unsourced statements in this article such as:
'Slade became one of a small number of researchers who can be called the world's experts on malware. Fred Cohen named Slade's early work organizing computer viruses, software, BBSes and book reviews Mr. Slade's lists.' The references given for this claim are the subjects OWN writings. There is no link to Fred Cohen even mentioning Robert Slade.
'Slade advanced the field of computer forensics when through his antivirus research he found that the intentions and identity of virus authors can be discovered in their program code' The source for this is the subjects own book.
I cannot find anyone else claiming Mr. Slade has made a significant or notable impact.
Comments welcome?Willbennett2007 (talk) 01:49, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
As I look further virtually every claim in this article comes from press releases like the authors bio (which authors themselves create for publishers), and the authors own books/websites. This does not seem to be a genuinely notable subject?Willbennett2007 (talk) 01:56, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
- I will put it up for deletion. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 02:11, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
This page should be deleted. All of the references are self-references. There appear to be no external references as to this individuals work being notable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.232.60.155 (talk) 02:57, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
This discussion was closed on August 24 as "no consensus". -SusanLesch (talk) 17:45, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deletion edit
Why is this article still here? The ONLY sources are his own publisher and his own website. Not a single magazine, newspaper, or journal reference to this person. His claim to fame is being a consultant who wrote a couple of books. How does this meet notability requirements? I don't know how it survived deletion this long? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.231.40.130 (talk) 17:01, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Because it was put up for deletion, but the deletion request was closed as "no consensus". -SusanLesch (talk) 17:45, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Hmm the person saying there was 'no consensus' is also the original author of the article. Who also happens to have some sort of connection to the topic, Robert Slade:
http://www.faqs.org/faqs/computer-virus/macintosh-faq/
http://www.informit.com/articles/article.aspx?p=25287&seqNum=7
How is this anything other than a simple puff piece for Robert Slade, a person of very dubious notoriety, written and defended by someone connected to him? How does this meet wikepedia standards...I again recommend this for deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.64.206.194 (talk) 15:17, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
To answer your questions: this is one of many reasons Wikipedia is not considered a reliable source. Things get included or deleted based on the whims of a handful of editors. In this case it is clear that someone who has NO notability is included because one prolific editor wants him to be. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.136.90.60 (talk) 20:21, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
OK this was put up for deletion quite some time ago. Not sure how it survived. We have a guy who wrote a couple of books, none were particularly popular. Nothing else. He is not a professor anywhere, not a notable speaker, not a major author, has not created any standards, etc. The links used are from HIS own website. So how is this article still here? I agree with the comment from 2014: things like this are why Wikipedia is NOT notable. There are notable security authors (like the late Shon Harris) who are household names (at least in cyber security) with no Wikipedia page...then unknowns like Robert Slade, who have a page...... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.130.117.85 (talk) 11:42, 22 June 2016 (UTC)