Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Edgardo Donovan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete, however a copy of this article is located at User:Edgardo Donovan, which is fine since there is a consensus that this belongs on a userpage and not in the main article space. Sjakkalle (Check!) 10:01, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Edgardo Donovan

It is already noted within this article that the user may have created this page in error ; however, they have not taken the opportunity to move it to their own user space.

Most of the contribution to the article has been made by the user himself - and while it's an extremely impressive CV, it does read like a lot of self promotion. --Zaphod Beeblebrox 09:52, 20 July 2005 (UTC)


Zaphod, I created this page so that I could provide some evidence to my claims regarding being a polyglot because many people on the list have not done so. Sorry if I am causing you trouble. I am new at this. I tried moving my page without success. Would it help if I got somebody else to write a short bio on me? What if I just included my name and the languages that I speak thus eliminating all of my background information? Please advise.

If anyone has any advice on how to maintain "notable" credibility while reducing the "vanity" feel of my biography I would be grateful for any feedback.


I would like to thank Zaphod Beeblebrox for his contribution for he brings up some valid points regarding the recent publishing of my biography. I can understand some of the reasons why he feels that my biography published in Wikipedia's notable polyglots listing may appear as a vanity page: it is self authored, it is about a living person, it is not about a sports/entertainment celebrity, nor is it about an author who has been published in printed media with readerships greater than 5000 people.


However, I believe that I fulfill three criteria for "notable" status discussed in your online encyclopaedia. The main criteria I used justifying the publishing of my self authored boigraphy is the following:


"1. Painters, sculptors, architects, engineers, and other professionals whose work is recognized as exceptional and likely to become a part of the enduring historical record of that field."


My "notable" achievement which fulfills the above criteria is the following:

I am a professional linguist who speaks, reads, and understands 30 languages 8 of which have been tested via a series of US State Department DLPT exams (Defense Language Proficiency Test). Therefore, according to your encyclopaedia provided that all of the polyglot language claims are factual I would be the 3rd ranked living hyperpolyglot as well as the 10th ranked hyperpolyglot in recorded history.

The DLPT is available only for a limited number of languages. However, practically all remaining languages I am proficient in not available for testing are hybrids involving languages where I have already documented DLPT proficiency. The DLPT is administered by the US Department of Defense and records can be requested by contacting the Defense Language Institute in Monterey, California.


The second criteria I used justifying the publishing of my "notable" self authored biography is the following:


"2. Persons achieving renown or notoriety for their involvement in newsworthy events "


There are two events in my career as a technologist and entrepreneur that were witnessed by tens of thousands of people. The first is my video chat session with Bill Gates during the launch of his book "Business at the Speed of Thought" on March 31, 1999. This event was witnessed by a worldwide audience well into the millions. Video clips of this video chat session are available on my personal web site. The second was the press release distributed around the world when the 67 country localized online recruiting database I own and operate (iDonovan) was recognized as for having the widest global presence withinin the online recruiting industry. This can be verified via a variety of non-affiliated independent business news sites by searching for "idonovan" on Google.


3. The third criteria I believe I fulfill is the "Google Test":


"Edgardo Donovan" and my shortened name "Eddie Donovan" return 208 and 1,840 hits on Google respectively. It would be wrong to attribute these hits soley to my personal home page "EddieDonovan" (376 hits on Google). A significant portion of my apparant popularity on the web are due to two on-line business ventures I have managed over the years: NETworldwide (628 hits on Google) and iDonovan (5,640 hits on Google).

I realize that having listed my academic credentials as well as precise details regarding my professional background may seem as an attempt to market my persona. I did so because I feel that those experiences have contributed greatly to my linguistic accomplishments. Those details can be easily verified for those interested in doing so.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Edgardo Donovan 13:47, 20 July 2005 (UTC).

  • Delete. Vanity. Yeah, I'm sure every "Eddie Donovan" on goggle is this guy. The above rant doesn't win me over either. -R. fiend 14:56, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. I fear a headache will result of this. Anyways, "I created this page so that I could provide some evidence to my claims regarding being a polyglot" should kill it right there. He created the page for the express purpose of it being a vanity page. What more is necessary, exactly? It's been created in the vein of a pissing contest. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 15:12, July 20, 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. It's hard to avoid vanity when writing about yourself. Impressive, but hardly neutral. --Several Times 15:16, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Not sure. He would be notable for number of languages, but not otherwise. He appears to have added himself to List of noted polyglots. But this does go against the precept of not writing your own page. I think I'll pass on this one. — RJH 15:38, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. No, Delete with extreme prejudice. In fact, Delete, while retaining a copy as a future reference and object example of what "vanity" means. Edgardo, I realise that there is a policy about not biting the newbies, but you have solicited comments on 'how to maintain "notable" credibility while reducing the "vanity" feel of my biography' and this, I'm afraid, makes it open season.
I am a professional linguist who speaks, reads, and understands 30 languages 8 of which have been tested via a series of US State Department DLPT exams (Defense Language Proficiency Test). Therefore, according to your encyclopaedia provided that all of the polyglot language claims are factual I would be the 3rd ranked living hyperpolyglot as well as the 10th ranked hyperpolyglot in recorded history.
No, you are not a professional linguist. A linguist is a person engaged in the scientific study of human language. As a real linguist, and for the three billionth time, I want to make plain to you and all other DLI graduates - since DLI graduates as a group seem to have the most trouble with this concept - that the word linguist does not mean what the DOD means when it says it wants a linguist. A person whose marketable skills are their knowledge of various languages is, depending on the role they fulfil, an interpreter, a translator, a language expert, or in the US Army's case, occasionally a professional torturerinterrogator. None of those job categories overlaps with being a linguist.
And no, from the list of languages you know, your language skills are probably quite good but not really remarkable. You claim to have some knowledge of 24 largely cognate romance dialects, one of which appears to be effectively a native language, and a minimal knowledge of German and a close Alemannic dialect. I think I might be able to pass a basic State Dept competency exam in 24 fairly similar romance dialects - State is not renowned for high standards - and I know I could in at least three Germanic languages, and all I did was waste my youth smoking pot on the Plateau. I suspect a lot of people who do translation here could claim the same.
Frankly, the "world record" aspect of List of noted polyglots bothers me a great deal, since these counts of languages measure nothing at all unless the level of competence, and the degree of similarity between dialects, is taken into account. I can probably figure out where the bathroom is in over a dozen languages, but I can hold down a job in two, maybe three. You claim DLPT level 3 competency in French, Spanish, Portuguese and Italian. I imagine that means you are only genuinely fluent - in the sense of being able to handle colloquial language in all contexts - in only those four languages (plus, I presume, English). That's no small feat, but these four languages are quite closely related and I know a fair number of people able to handle themselves in all four plus English.
The Farsi knowledge is different (although going from there to the closely related Dari and Pashtu languages is less so), but I imagine that's what you paid DLI's enormous fees to learn. Still, it's a 2+ level, less than the romance languages you name. By itself, that is not noteworthy.
The rest is not in the slightest noteworthy. --Diderot 15:51, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. If you are the third-ranking hyperpolyglot in the world (hey! I created that article :)), then surely there ought to be some attention from the outside world. Are you ever cited in the mainstream press for your abilities? Have there been any papers written on you? In short, are there any outside references (not on the web) as to your abilities? — Asbestos | Talk 15:54, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete, vanity as per Consumed Crustacean. —PrologFan {Talk} 19:18, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

Response to R. fiend 14:56, 20 July 2005 (UTC) - Thank you for your feedback. I did not imply that every Google entry under "Eddie Donovan" was mine. I clearly stated that entries under "EddieDonovan" were mine. The latter would bring up entries only for my personal web page. What did you mean by "rant"? Were you implying that the facts I used to support my case are not factual? If so, what can evidence can you present to support such a thesis?

Response to Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 15:12, July 20, 2005 (UTC) and Several Times 15:16, 20 July 2005 (UTC) - Thank you for your feedback. You both bring up valid points. If it is an act of vanity to write about myself or to list evidence backing up my accomplishments how can I avoid doing so if I wish to publish evidence to back up my claims? I thought about getting somebody else to write a blurb on me. I could also omit everything except my name, languages I claim various levels of proficiency in, and the university where my DLPT scores are consoldiated into a single transcript. Are there any precedents involving a similar debate on this encyclopaedia? How were they resolved?

Response to Diderot 15:51, 20 July 2005 (UTC) - Thank you for your having taken the time to write such lengthy feedback. Here is an American-English definition of the word linguist I found earlier today:

lin·guist ( P ) Pronunciation Key (lnggwst) n. A person who speaks several languages fluently. A specialist in linguistics.

[Latin lingua, language; see dgh- in Indo-European Roots + -ist.] [Download Now or Buy the Book] Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.


Here is a British-English definition of the word linguist I found earlier today:

linguist

 • noun 1 a person skilled in foreign languages. 2 a person who studies linguistics. 

 — ORIGIN from Latin lingua ‘language’.

Perform another search of the Compact Oxford English Dictionary

Just so there is no more confusion here is another definition from Webster:

Main Entry: lin·guist Pronunciation: 'li[ng]-gwist Function: noun Etymology: Latin lingua language, tongue 1 : a person accomplished in languages; especially : one who speaks several languages 2 : a person who specializes in linguistics

Whether a person is skilled, accomplished, or has varying degrees in of proficiency in a variety of languages the definitions above clearly prove that the term linguist is not restricted soley to academics who study and teach linguistics for a living. Therefore, the DOD is not wrong in adding the term to certain job titles that require expertise in foreign languages. For the record, I am a professional linguist within the DOD. If you do not agree take it up with the DOD, the Oxford dictionary, and Webster's dictionary.

I find it strange that the other DLI graduates that you have communicated with in the past have never called your attention to the above definitions. Perhaps they were initimidated by the mystique of your intellectual occupation or your overall knowledge of linguistics. Who knows? In any event, I think that it would be intellectually honest on your part to email all those you have lectured on why they are not linguists and set the record straight. Do many of your colleagues share this same bias against those who choose to learn and use languages as opposed to studying linguistics? Do you think this could be some type of superiority complex? I do not think there is a need for any side to nurture inferiority/superiority complexes vis-a-vis one another. One must be able to accept that people who study and teach linguistics for a living will usually be better at understanding the dynamics, structure, and history of a language whereas those who make use of language for a living can be expected to be better at their craft than the former.

While I do not expect all feedback to be on topic I did not appreciate the torturer accusation you extended to me and other DLI alumni. I do not agree with that characterization and would appreciate it that your political prejudices be reserved for other areas within the public domain.

I also do not see where how the payment of my schooling at DLI has anything to do with discussing the notable or non-notable status of my accomplishment. Perhaps you reserve a deep bias against those who did not work themselves through school or perhaps the other way around depending on convenience. Regardless, it is irrelevant to the discussion.

It is a valid point if you think that my language ability is less notable because my 30 languages which are all official languages in varying parts of the world represent 3 language groups with closely related languages and dialects within them. However, your predictions on how you think you would do on tests that I have already taken are not valid excuses for you to belittle my linguistic ability. Take all the tests I have taken and if you do as well or better than me then you can tell the world on this encyclopadia how non notable BOTH OUR linguistic abilities are.

If we are to set up an accomplished polyglot ranking we must accept that we will not be able to scientifically determine the "most notable" polyglot simply because the difficulty in language learning is subjective according to target languages and domestic culture. Furthermore, it is difficult to adhere to a reliable standard in testing proficiency. This is especially difficult to do with those who have long been deceased. I posted my DLPT score so to offer a starting point for a dialogue that could lead to more reliable scrutiny. You, like many others, complain that you do not like the hit parade approach devoid of any objective evaluation methodology and yet instead of welcoming testing methodologies such as the DLPT, crude as they may be, you prefer to belittle them preferring to stick to the conventional methodology of guesswork while deferring to a person's fame and prestige in areas often not related to languages.

I appreciate your trying to put my declared proficiency into context. Actually, with the exception of Romanian and Moldovan I speak most of my romance languages at a quasi-native level. The DLPT is a flawed test which only tests up to 3 level. But it is better than nothing especially in an area, as you correctly pointed out, where there is no standard to measure ability in using a language to communicate. I cannot hold a corporate management job in the Germanic and Persian languages. However, holding a corporate management job in 10+ languages is an impossible standard to measure oneself against. Even Mezzofanti as well as many Popes would have had a problem with that. ;-)

Response to Asbestos | Talk 15:54, 20 July 2005 (UTC) - You bring up a valid point. I have not ever seeked to interest newspapers regarding my accomplishment. I doubt I would be able to generate very strong interest even if I tried. I never thought that the media has a burning desire to write about living linguists who speak many languages unless they are politicans, entertainment stars, or sports celebrities. Generally knowing a lot of languages will not get you that much fame. Ziad Fazah, for example, appeared in Brazil's variety show Fantastico a few times which spurred a handful of articles. However, eventually the buzz died down. Many of the Google hits (431) for himself are attributable to the notable polyglot page off of this encyclopaedia. The search for "Kenneth Hale" linguist brings up only 463 entries. That is not that much when considering a lifetime of publishing linguistics papers into the public domain with the backing and prestige of many prominent universities such as MIT. Regardless, I will note any press attention I get in the future and/or if I delve into an academic career that involves lots of publishing may be able to garner the necesary prestige to satisfy types as yourself. Do you know of any associations, councils, or publications to whom I could ask to evaluate my abilities thereby starting the PR process you alluded to?

  • Userify - Edgardo Donovan 20 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. -moan.- Vanity. Thorns Among Our Leaves 19:24, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Very talented guy, if true, but store it on your user page. --Scimitar parley 19:30, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. NN. Google of "Eddie Donovan" and "linguist" gets only three hits, all wrong. Knowing all those languages is cool, but outside acknowledgement of accomplishments is needed. I can say I'm the world's best at something, but I'm still not notable until others say it. --A D Monroe III 19:49, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Just vanity, and as said above, the bar for notoriety is usually set when someone wants to write an article about you. --Titoxd 20:53, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Userify C'mon guys, there's no reason for which he cannot keep this under his user page. drini ☎ 21:13, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
    • I'm not exactly sure where the official policy on userfication is, but it seems to me if Edgardo wants to put the contents of the article in his userspace he is free to at any time, right? Either way it's deleted from the article space, which is what we're voting on. -R. fiend 22:01, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Userfy or Delete--Porturology 21:39, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
  • So he speaks 30 languages. Big deal, they're all Indo-European. Delete, don't bother userfying. He's just an attention-seeker, and childishly self-centered. Binadot 21:51, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Blatant vanity. I'd be more impressed by someone fluent in English, Swahili, and Mandarin than by his 30 Indo-European languages. --Carnildo 23:15, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Userfy Certainly not notable for his concise prose style :) Fernando Rizo 00:02, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete/Userfy nn vanity. --Etacar11 00:50, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete or Userfy this pumped-up CV. Vanity in both the Wikipedia & dictionary sense. And big whoop on the padded list of languages -- only the Pahstu & Farsi gets my attention. Besides, the person sitting at the desk next to me speaks English, French, Japanese, and Spanish (with a smattering of German, Russian, and Farsi), while another of my friends can handle English, Mandarin, Uigher, Russian, Kazakh, and some Japanese. Those are more impressive for me. --Calton | Talk 01:54, July 21, 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete Vanity. This is why we have a policy against autobio articles. Even if this fellow were notable, his sense of his own accomplishment is so blatantly inflated that we cannot trust him to provide a fair account of himself. Why fight so hard for a WP article on yourself? You have only alienated others with your obvious pride, however justified or unjustified it may be. Xoloz 03:18, 21 July 2005 (UTC)


I asked for feedback and I got it. Thank you. Although, some of the responses were personal criticisms launched under the cover of anonymity of a username handle I have enjoyed the debate for the most part. Just because I do not agree with certain issues with some people does not require that I or they should feel alienated. A healthy debate is a great way to prevent a stagnant group-think mentality.

Here is what I have been able to sum up thanks to this discussion:

1) Unfair as it may seem, recognition of linguistic ability hinges upon celebrity status often not related to languages. It is silly for me to think that I can in anyway change the centuries old dynamic of this field. This notable polyglot list being the only one of its kind in the world along with the absence of internationally recognized polygot awards is a testament to this cultural filtration phenomenon.

2) In order to become included in the notable polyglot directory I must get external recognition beyond test scores. I doubt that I will be able to do this with journalists for the reasons I discussed above. Perhaps by becoming more involved with people in the linguistics field a la Kenneth Hale I may be able to count on them for references once they have verified my actual language abilities.

3) To gain the respect of some of my critics it may help to learn additional non-Indo European languages such as Russian and Mandarin to the point where I can begin to understand other lesser practiced languages or dialects within their sphere of influence. This would emulate the methodology I have used in learning Indo-European languages.

4) To ensure that my language abilities be recognized for posterity it would be imperative for me to become a famous politician, actor, author, or musician. If anyone has any advice on proven methodology towards achieving celebrity status in any of the aforementioned ways I am all ears. ;-)

Thank you for contributing to making Wikipedia possible.

Best wishes.

Kind regards,

Edgardo Donovan 05:26, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.