Talk:Sean Gabb

This entry is self-authored by the subject

This page is not impartial and is almost certainly written by Sean Gabb or someone close enough to him to have a conflict of interest.

In any case, the entry is full of biased, promotional content. It is also far longer than is necessary.

Can it be cut down to something smaller and impartial, and could User:Kentishresident be prevented from making further edits?

DannieHorowitz (talk) 15:33, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

I agree, needs some serious trimming down. Joseph2302 (talk) 21:59, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Ok, have cut out some of the material that seemed unnecessary as well as problematic from a conflict of interest point of view. DannieHorowitz (talk) 16:59, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Have cut the political writings section down so as to be more succinct and impartial in tone DannieHorowitz (talk) 17:24, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Untitled

I have added a note on Dr. Gabb's racism and antihellenism as well as pointing out the fact tha he wrote this article himself, i.e. it is an autobiographical piece. Also added a section on his antihellenism with sources from his articles. These are currently scant but I have high hopes once he next visits this page that some more material will be forthcoming. If you feel you must delete the Mr. Bean influence please take two points into accaccount (1) whether he has confessed it or not, it's indubitably there. (2) there is no source on his other model's either, so I think it should be included for completeness. I also added a better picture from his website that vividly illustrates the last point and I feel better captures the essence of the man. Filoxenos (talk) 20:50, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

"Antihellinism"

I have put an Original Research tag on this section. It is in clear contravention of WP:OR. As you are trying to act in good faith I will leave this section alone for a couple of days before deleting it to give some time for sources to be found to show that his comments on modern Greeks have been objected to. JASpencer (talk) 14:04, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

You can hardly blame me that no-one cares about what he writes. If a tree falls in the forest etc... Oh, well...Take care. Filoxenos (talk) 20:09, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

This is quite similar to Koh-i-noor fracas, but there really does not seem to have been much off-Wikipedia reaction. Has anyone seen any? JASpencer (talk) 07:38, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

I second Filoxenos. If a tree falls in the forest etc., (Mropendialogue (talk) 18:47, 8 August 2010 (UTC))

Doctor?

Of what? Phd? MD? --Cameron Scott (talk) 17:00, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

He has a PhD in Political and Intellectual History (Middlesex, 1998). Bastin 23:20, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Sean on the British empire

I have added a entry on Sean Gabb's controversial position on the role of the British Empire along with direct quotes. My intent is no ensure that readers are not misled about his claim. Which is why I include direct quotes which are properly sourced.

Please have a look at WP:BLP and WP:RS. This section is likely to be deleted as there is no one outside Sean Gabb's self published source on this. I think that would be a mistake as he has had some considerable criticism on this and it does matter when understanding him. However keep the racism claims down. 21:40, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Let's be clear about this for something to be "controversial" in wikipedia terms, multiple reliable sources have to comment upon it, it's not simply enough that the subject of the article says something, someone has to comment on it. Calling those remarks controversial without reliable sources is simply original research and that is not permitted. --Cameron Scott (talk) 09:00, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

The difficulty here is that it clearly was controversial as there are so many comments that are being responded to. There's only one external source that I've found (Samizdata). However calling Sean Gabb a racist and reading him out of the Libertarian Movement is probably too far. JASpencer (talk) 15:16, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

If you can only find one reliable source, it's not controversial by our reckoning. We have to use reliable sources for BLP articles. --Cameron Scott (talk) 12:13, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

I understand that, but the source quotes a number of responses. I'm not saying that by the rules this should be kept in, it's just that the rules don't seem to cater for this type of event. JASpencer (talk) 12:59, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

It's user-generated context and thus not reliable. To say it's controversial because it has X responses would be original research on our part. Unless Reliable sources comment on this, there is nothing to say. --Cameron Scott (talk) 13:15, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

That is indeed a strange definition of 'reliable'. (Mropendialogue (talk) 00:47, 10 August 2010 (UTC))

Some New Sources

This is getting a bit unbalanced and there is a lot of undue weight on random controversies (usually something people don't like about what he's said). Here are some more quotes, etc:

http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=%22Sean+Gabb%22&hl=en&tbs=nws:1,ar:1&source=lnt&sa=X&ei=qNRdTOnaG-fgsAbv353LBw&ved=0CBIQpwU

JASpencer (talk) 21:53, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

It appears he is saying a lot of things that people do not like to attract attention. (Mropendialogue (talk) 18:45, 8 August 2010 (UTC))

References

An awful lot of the references are either to his own blog, or to articles written by him for organisations he was working for. Frankly it's a bit of a linkfarm for his self-promotion. DuncanHill (talk) 11:20, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

In fact I am struggling to find any independent reliable sources to suggest that he has any notability whatsoever. DuncanHill (talk) 13:24, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Agreed.SovalValtos (talk) 13:51, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Agreed. I have nominated the article for deletion. L.R. Wormwood (talk) 14:06, 11 March 2018 (UTC)