Talk:Jona Lendering

message: And all those Pokemon cards, episodes of obscure sci-fi shows, unsuccessful politicians (who campaigned but didn't win seats), porn movies, minor villages in Canada, are more notable? Mr. Lendering is an authority on ancient Babylon and Persia, his books on Antiquity at least (I can't answer to the ones on management, which I believe were his earliest) are mainstream and refereed by reputable publishers, with at least one translated into foreign languages; and he's notable enough to be interviewed from time to time. Bill 11:41, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree with Dbachmann that this article does not meet with the criteria of notability. A merger with his website sounds logical, but also I do not see any reason why his website should have an article while there are so many websites which do not. Therefore a merger or a complete deletion is at its place.--Babakexorramdin (talk) 17:16, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: "Non-notable"

message: Chris O wrote:
   rm Robert Gibbs - who is this person and why is his view of any significance?) (undo) 
 and deleted  this text from the artcile "Shadows in the Desert: Ancient Persia at War 
- The book was recommended to the World Affairs International Society of Stanford University by one Robert Gibbs.[http://cgi.stanford.edu/group/wais/cgi-bin/?p=11367 "Introducing 'Shadows in the Desert'" by Robert Gibbs  
Aplyying the same formula means that we should delete all referrences from this page (Livius onderwisj). If stanford is not notable, then Jakarta post isn't either. BY the way who is Stronk, Jan P and and why is his view of any significance?)  By the way why is an aryical in Euroepan neurology is relevant? ^ Valmantas Budrys (July 2005). "Neurological Eponyms Derived from Literature and Visual Art". European Neurology 53: 171–178. doi:10.1159/000086150.   I know that some people here are having double standards, but I ask them to be fair and delete these ferrences themselves, or restore the referrences in the other article.--Babakexorramdin (talk) 13:54, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Jan P. Stronk is an ancient historian at the University of Amsterdam, reviewing Lendering's book for an academic journal, and therefore exactly the sort of person whose views are relevant. As for the media citations of Lendering's website, I didn't intend to represent these as authoritative or as conferring notability, but it's potentially interesting to the reader of this article that the website has been cited as a source in print publications. EALacey (talk) 15:24, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  J.P. Stronk is a Dutch historian, with a modest academic record. Much better than Lendering, but still nothing compared to Frye! It is obvious that Farrokh has better academic support than Lendering. It was not very wise of Lendering to beging the smear campaign, because he started a war that he is going to lose, ultimately!--Babakexorramdin (talk) 02:40, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

text: Then the article should be about the book, not the person.  Since the book has gotten multiple reviews.  But the book itself does not satisfy WP:CREATIVE since it has done nothing significant by collecting a list of eastern sources on Alexander which already had exist and indeed the book is not comprehensive.  The only English review called it a "general book".  So it has not have had a significant impact(like say the Harry Potter book) for the author to have his own article.  So I agree, the book satisfies WP:BOOK because of the reviews, but this does not mean the author who is not significant should have an Encyclopedic Entry.  Let me ask you this, suppose I have written an academic engineering book/paper and it was reviewed by third parties, is that enough to get an article under my name?  Afterall journal articles are always 3rd party reviewed.  So the person is not significant (I mean he did not win the noble prize or is well known) but the book possibly does satisfy WP:BOOK which can deserve it's own article.  Actually I believe the page should be moved to the book and the livus be mentioned on the site with a small biography of the author of the book in the same book article.--Nepaheshgar (talk) 16:31, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  all referrenes here should be deleted if. 

message: this article was discussed and most people agreed that he was not a notable person. So I put the notability tag again. --Babakexorramdin (talk) 17:14, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  well I see I should have posted this on the article on himself. By the way not all High schools are notable. There are so many High schools all around the world and in the Netherlands. the centers of higher education could be notable, if they are recognized by the ministry. But his self-made school is not.--Babakexorramdin (talk) 23:13, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't disagree with you on the highschools thing, but that is common practice now on WP and seems to be the consensus of people that work on articles about schools: highschools are automatically considered notable, no matter where they are, recognized or not. --Crusio (talk) 23:31, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  put back the notability tag 

message: And all those Pokemon cards, episodes of obscure sci-fi shows, unsuccessful politicians (who campaigned but didn't win seats), porn movies, minor villages in Canada, are more notable? Mr. Lendering is an authority on ancient Babylon and Persia, his books on Antiquity at least (I can't answer to the ones on management, which I believe were his earliest) are mainstream and refereed by reputable publishers, with at least one translated into foreign languages; and he's notable enough to be interviewed from time to time. Bill 11:41, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree with Dbachmann that this article does not meet with the criteria of notability. A merger with his website sounds logical, but also I do not see any reason why his website should have an article while there are so many websites which do not. Therefore a merger or a complete deletion is at its place.--Babakexorramdin (talk) 17:16, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: "Non-notable"

message: Chris O wrote:
   rm Robert Gibbs - who is this person and why is his view of any significance?) (undo) 
 and deleted  this text from the artcile "Shadows in the Desert: Ancient Persia at War 
- The book was recommended to the World Affairs International Society of Stanford University by one Robert Gibbs.[http://cgi.stanford.edu/group/wais/cgi-bin/?p=11367 "Introducing 'Shadows in the Desert'" by Robert Gibbs  
Aplyying the same formula means that we should delete all referrences from this page (Livius onderwisj). If stanford is not notable, then Jakarta post isn't either. BY the way who is Stronk, Jan P and and why is his view of any significance?)  By the way why is an aryical in Euroepan neurology is relevant? ^ Valmantas Budrys (July 2005). "Neurological Eponyms Derived from Literature and Visual Art". European Neurology 53: 171–178. doi:10.1159/000086150.   I know that some people here are having double standards, but I ask them to be fair and delete these ferrences themselves, or restore the referrences in the other article.--Babakexorramdin (talk) 13:54, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Jan P. Stronk is an ancient historian at the University of Amsterdam, reviewing Lendering's book for an academic journal, and therefore exactly the sort of person whose views are relevant. As for the media citations of Lendering's website, I didn't intend to represent these as authoritative or as conferring notability, but it's potentially interesting to the reader of this article that the website has been cited as a source in print publications. EALacey (talk) 15:24, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  J.P. Stronk is a Dutch historian, with a modest academic record. Much better than Lendering, but still nothing compared to Frye! It is obvious that Farrokh has better academic support than Lendering. It was not very wise of Lendering to beging the smear campaign, because he started a war that he is going to lose, ultimately!--Babakexorramdin (talk) 02:40, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

text: Then the article should be about the book, not the person.  Since the book has gotten multiple reviews.  But the book itself does not satisfy WP:CREATIVE since it has done nothing significant by collecting a list of eastern sources on Alexander which already had exist and indeed the book is not comprehensive.  The only English review called it a "general book".  So it has not have had a significant impact(like say the Harry Potter book) for the author to have his own article.  So I agree, the book satisfies WP:BOOK because of the reviews, but this does not mean the author who is not significant should have an Encyclopedic Entry.  Let me ask you this, suppose I have written an academic engineering book/paper and it was reviewed by third parties, is that enough to get an article under my name?  Afterall journal articles are always 3rd party reviewed.  So the person is not significant (I mean he did not win the noble prize or is well known) but the book possibly does satisfy WP:BOOK which can deserve it's own article.  Actually I believe the page should be moved to the book and the livus be mentioned on the site with a small biography of the author of the book in the same book article.--Nepaheshgar (talk) 16:31, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  all referrenes here should be deleted if. 

message: this article was discussed and most people agreed that he was not a notable person. So I put the notability tag again. --Babakexorramdin (talk) 17:14, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  well I see I should have posted this on the article on himself. By the way not all High schools are notable. There are so many High schools all around the world and in the Netherlands. the centers of higher education could be notable, if they are recognized by the ministry. But his self-made school is not.--Babakexorramdin (talk) 23:13, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't disagree with you on the highschools thing, but that is common practice now on WP and seems to be the consensus of people that work on articles about schools: highschools are automatically considered notable, no matter where they are, recognized or not. --Crusio (talk) 23:31, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  put back the notability tag 

message: I am not sure how this person makes WP:notability.  If it is media, then BBC, Voice of America and History channel are bigger.  If it is one book, then it has not been endorsed by giants like Richard Frye and at most, there should be an article about the book.    That is okay, because I am not even going to touch the recent articles with this issue anymore but I just had to mention this point.--Nepaheshgar (talk) 00:03, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: um, yes? this is why it is tagged with ? What does Richard Frye have to do with anything? If you feel it should just be deleted, nobody is stopping you from taking it to AfD. --dab (𒁳) 09:50, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  The problem is that the Lendering's online army scream that Richard's Frye compliment's to Farrokh is not important, while Jakarta post of the Dutch guy's reiew of lendering is. What a funny world.--Babakexorramdin (talk) 22:53, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Double Standard 

message: I have asked the editor who performed a premature non-admin closure to re-open the AfD, so that it can run for the full 5 days and everyone interested will have the chance to contribute. --Crusio (talk) 20:39, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. — neuro(talk) 22:12, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Premature AfD closure 

message: I've posted this at WP:BLPN: For several years that has been a web-based campaign against Jona Lendering which occasionally is taken to his Wikipedia article. An IP has recently been adding material about a petition signed by apparently 1400 people accusing Lendering of racism (the IP doesn't link to it, perhaps because the site is blacklisted, but it is at www.gopetition.com/petitions/jona-lendering-anti-iran.html. The last couple of todays I and another editor have reverted it. The IP has also been adding a link to an article in a web based magazine which the IP describes as academic criticism although it isn't in anything resembling an academic publication and the authors are described in the article as "Saam Safavi-Zadeh is from Tabriz, Iran and is pursuing his graduate studies in the study of ancient Iran in France. Anna Djakashvili-Bloehm lives in France with a keen interest in studying ancient Babylon and Persia." A new bit is the addition to a link on Kaveh Farrokh's page (thus self-published) which says "More recently Dr. Kaveh Farrokh,a historian with the University of British Columbia, has prepared a critique that details Jona Lendering’s activities as a purported online historian,".  Farrokh is actually a student counsellor at Langara College of Higher Learning and although he has published books on the history of Iran his PhD is related to his professional career as a counsellor.  I'd appreciate other views on this. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 07:32, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: ;IP blocked (not by me) as a sock of Rjbronn Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Rjbronn/Archive is the old case. Dougweller (talk) 12:38, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accusations of racism 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Jona Lendering. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131004213351/http://www.uitgeverijathenaeum.nl/web/Artikel/Jona-Lendering-wint-de-OIKOS-publieksprijs-2010.htm to http://www.uitgeverijathenaeum.nl/web/Artikel/Jona-Lendering-wint-de-OIKOS-publieksprijs-2010.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:11, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified