Talk:David DeAngelo

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is supported by the Arts and Entertainment work group.
Articles for deletion
This page was previously nominated for deletion. Please see prior discussion(s) before considering re-nomination:
  • No consensus, 6 March 2007, AFD
  • No consensus, 29 September 2005, AFD
Archive
Archives
Archive 1 - September 2005 - December 2006


Contents

[edit] Nice guy syndrome

Has anyone noticed that this page has been deleted? Even though this deletion discussion ame out keep? Is there any way to get the page back? Ppe42 05:13, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

  • There were three deletion attempts on this article, the first two of which failed to reach a consensus. The page you pointed to was the first. If you do some searching, you can probably find the latest deletion vote listed under Articles for Deletion from about two weeks ago.
  • The only way to "get back" the page would be to list the page for undeletion. Because the delete vote was nearly unanimous, however, the chances of gaining support for the undeletion would be slim. --Quintin3265 14:40, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
Well ... bugger. I really think we needed that article. Ah well, maybe it can be resurrected at some future point. Meanwhile, I'll unlink the phrase. Ppe42 14:17, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
Fully agreed. Nice Guy Syndrome deserves to be covered because it is a common social occurance. Indeed, it's becoming a bigger occurance than it was in the past due to changed social structures, media conditioning, etc. One reason for deletion may be that there is not enough scientific basis for it; the fact that Speed Seduction and DYD exists, and that there is much interest in it, is proof enough that Nice Guy Sydrome is there. Like many other Wikipedia articles, if we are to keep Wikipedia "current" we must accept articles on domains that are not totally established or accepted. --- Anon —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.202.160.138 (talk) 08:58, 9 January 2007 (UTC).

A relevant page now exists at Nice guy. This is already linked in the article. -- Sasuke Sarutobi 02:03, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Latest edits to 'Criticism' section

DutchSeduction - I had removed the 'considered by some to be more effective' comment because it is redundant. Of course it would be 'considered by some to be more effective' - why would they propose it otherwise? The fact that it contains weasel words doesn't help its case.

Your other addition is misleading and false. Its source is an open post in a free-to-access forum. Since when has Fast Seduction 101 been commercial? Even if Dimitri, the author, is 'commercial' now, the letter was written more than a year prior to the founding of his company.

I've left the sections in for now, since I don't want to start an edit war.

-- Sasuke Sarutobi 19:43, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

If I were to say that Fast Seduction 101 is commercial, I would incur the wrath of Formhandle! Ha. The truth is that his site is registered as a company, which by definition makes it "somewhat commercial." It also earns substantial advertising income. But why is this such an important point to you? DutchSeduction 18:50, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Uncited statements

I've moved the following uncited statements from the article to here:

He is among the most sought-after gurus in what is known as the "Seduction Community", [citation needed] and is believed to be the first guru to include guest teachers from other programs in his seminars, [citation needed] as well as the first to introduce a monthly interview series with those he considers to be skilled in seduction and related disciplines. [citation needed]

--Amit 21:04, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate that. Though please be a bit more careful when a person is baiting you on and avoid edit wars when you can even if the other party is in the wrong. Mathmo Talk 15:32, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
OK. --Amit 19:48, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Article name

There seems to be controversy regarding the relevant name for this article.

Hipocrite - you seem insistent that this article be located under David DeAngelo's real name (Eben Pagan).

Amit (I'll use that name, since it is how you sign your posts) - likewise, your wishes appear to be that it remains at 'David DeAngelo'.

As it is, this could degenerate into a move war. I would therefore like to start a dialogue over which should be appropriate.

-- Sasuke Sarutobi 02:03, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Sasuke Sarutobi for initiating this discussion here. As per WP:NC(CN), the most common name of a person is to be used. It also states that it okay to use pseudonyms like Mark Twain, Marilyn Monroe, Billy the Kid. Therefore, the name of this article should be David DeAngelo. --Amit 02:35, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
This discussion also applies to the Mystery (seduction guru) to Erik Von Markovik moves by Hipocrite. --Amit 02:51, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
"David DeAngelo" is a common name. To attribute the actions of Eben Pagen to David DeAngelo without some sort of wide understanding that there's some sort of actual person here is iffy. Let's also be clear - this is a controversy - laid out in the article (unsourced, of course), which accuses DeAngelo/Pagen of also being Carter. How many possible pseudonyms can someone have before we give up and list them at their verifiable legal name? Hipocrite - «Talk» 13:23, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Regarding the Christian Carter debate - there were direct links to the actual posts in which the debate took place, but they have been removed. I shall restore them.
— Sasuke Sarutobi 15:51, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Posts to forums are never acceptable sources. Hipocrite - «Talk» 15:56, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Never Say Never Again! Mathmo Talk 16:05, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Hipocrite - The entirity of the debate was conducted within a blog. How else do you expect it to be referenced?
— Sasuke Sarutobi 16:16, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
If it has never been referenced by a reliable source, it never happened. Hipocrite - «Talk» 16:19, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Amazing, I'm sure you must realise the flaws with that statement. For instance I'll take a guess your birth was never referenced by a reliable source, does that mean it never happened?! Within the community these are regarded as reliable sources for the subject matter at hand. Mathmo Talk 16:28, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
I would note that your inistance on incorprorating poorly sourced negative information about an individual is a blockable offence - please review WP:BLP. Hipocrite - «Talk» 16:29, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
My view is they should be moved back to how they were before Hipocrite started moving them about without prior discussion whatsoever. For reasons such as Amit stated. Hipocrite hasn't given any good reasons why they shouldn't be there, we are not claiming the article's title is the person's legal name. Also DeAngelo is the vastly more common name he goes under than any of the others he might use, so it is blatantly obvious what is the most common name here and thus where the article should be. Mathmo Talk 13:50, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

3:1 agreement has been achieved. I'm moving the article to its original name. If Hipocrite reverts, I request that Mathmo take it up on WP:AIV. --Amit 21:32, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

  • Just a friendly reminder here that WP:AIV is not for content disputes, which includes naming disagreements. Logical2uTalk 00:40, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
WP:CON. Have your walled garden. Do not remove maintence tags. Hipocrite - «Talk» 21:35, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Seeing that you and others seem to like using the phrase "walled garden" a lot, I'm taking this opportunity to remind you that there is no cabal! Mathmo Talk 00:37, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ad Tag

As the Ad tag is a separate issue from the name (Which is temporally solved, apparently), I've just started a minor thing here. The article is written primarily from the help of several "Subject-self-published" sources. However, I fail to see how these help the article or serve as useful. All sources should be independently verified. Being published by someone, and then used to write about that same someone, is technically not independent. There's an argument here, but it doesn't make that much sense this late at night. It involves Wikipedia articles being used as primary sources. The article deals a lot with his "Advanced Dating Techniques", which seems like either a plug, or something that would be better served as minor statements on a dating page. Removing his "Terms" and "Advice" sections would likely keep the article more concise, and less advertisement like.

Also, having a bunch of forums may violate the WP:EL rulings. Might.

So, my problems are : Conflicts of Interest (Sources are Articles published by subject), possible advertising (Both here and maybe on links), links may contain factually inaccurate material or unverifiable research, and forums, technically social networking sites.

WP:EL also says avoid blogs, but keeping their usage to a minimum would be enough for me. Hopefully this is taken a NPOV... Logical2uTalk 00:51, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

As far as I'm aware, the self-published sources are used for citing information and definitions of terms commonly used by DeAngelo. I should think that this is a reasonable use of such sources.
— Sasuke Sarutobi 19:23, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Biography assessment rating comment

The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- Jreferee 17:39, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Real name

To all those who insist that DeAngelo's real name be mentioned; why is this necessary? He does not use this name for seduction materials, and has not used it in such materials since he worked with Ross Jeffries. It is irrelevant.

— Sasuke Sarutobi 19:23, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Shall we also not mention the real name of the author of Alice in Wonderland? Because he didn't use is real name there either, it is frequent practice for writers to do this. This doesn't mean in all these many literary articles there will be no reference whatsoever to the real name. Mentioning DeAngelo's real name once or twice in the article is fine. Mathmo Talk 02:30, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Real name or pen name? The Anthony Robbins article gives Robbins pen name before giving the Tony Robbins or Anthony Robbins aliases. If the real name can be confirmed then it should probably be included. I don't know the official wikipedia policy on this. Have a look at a few of the other articles that are about pen names. --210.49.28.194 09:22, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Are you all sure "Eben Pagan" is his real name? It is not very likely. The logo on getaltitude.com is a very clear reference to masonery. Eben is a nickname for English Ebenezer, meaning "foundation stone, stone of help." Pagan-ism stands in some opions very close to ideas within free masonery. So is Eben Pagan not just a nice name to market his new product?

For whatever it is worth with regards to official wiki policy, I actually do believe it is his real name based on what I have seen. I have taken courses in other areas of business and those people I have studied from actually are good friends with him and call him Eben. I know it is WP:OR but I am just giving inside information here. The person's course I am studying with is teaching us about internet marketing and copywriting. He mentions the success of David DeAngelo Enterprises and always refers to the man as Eben Pagan. He himself has said he is paying $10,000 to attend Altitude so him being apart of some conspiracy to promote the Eben Pagan name seems far fetched.Arnabdas 23:10, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
In July 2007 I met some of his friends in Hvar Croatia, when i kept calling him David D they corrected me and told me his name was Eben —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.65.218.163 (talk) 16:14, August 29, 2007 (UTC)
Well, this is precisely what I was talking about when I put the page up in AfD -- there aren't any biographical sources we could go to if we wanted to check. (The above anonymous IP doing original research is the best you'll get.) There aren't enough sources about DeAngelo's life to make an article which conforms to WP:A. And that fact will remain true no matter how much you smokescreen the AfD process to get a "No consensus" verdict. The sources just simply don't exist. -- Drostie 13:01, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I think the article should refer to him primarily as DeAngelo rather than Pagan. As of this writing, the article refers to DeAngelo as Pagan thoughout the majority of the text. Many authors and actors use *pseudonym* (I'm pretty sure stage names are technically used by performers) rather than their real names and are refered to by their pseudonym rather than their birth names. Furthermore, DeAngelo is his name within the community the article adresses; to then refer to him as Pagan becomes confusing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Klectic (talk • contribs) 13:00, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't know how to provide this as evidence, but I have marketing email sent by him for Double Your Dating where the From: header is Eben Pagan <david@davidd.doubleyourdating.net> with a reply-to of eben@getaltitude.com .. I don't see why this is an issue. 71.145.175.250 (talk) 00:53, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Bibliography

I found it curious that there is no bibliography listed here. I have started one as a user subpage. It's still missing some detail (esp. the audio interviews). Any objections to adding this to the page? Chiok 18:11, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

I think it is a good idea, although whether having it is encyclopedic or not should probably be confirmed first. It has lots of lists - some may object to this unless it can be determined that having such bibliographies is proper practice. --Amit 19:43, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
I'd suspect it is common practice that the person's works are listed, though in the case where they wrote a lot on a selected group of them may be mentioned. Though I'd also suspect this is more likely due to practical reasons of nobody being bothered to type in every single book than for any real serious objections. Mathmo Talk 02:33, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Real name vs Stage name

I'm still not really satisfied about the real name vs stage name thing. I agree that the article name should be the most widely used name, but this is about a person with a real name right? In either way, unless WP:OR proves otherwise, his real name should at least be mentioned, so I figured I'd put his real name in front followed by "better known by stage..." Any other ideas?
thedarkestclear Talk 11:59, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Christian Carter

I've noticed that the Christian Carter topic has completely disappeared from this article. What's the deal? Can anyone fill me in? Henrymrx 14:04, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

It is likely that the topic was removed because there wasn't any adequate reference for it. --Amit 14:14, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] youtube profile

Thought it would be handy to have a link here on the talk page for now [1] Mathmo Talk 07:16, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Proposal for deleting his real-name, for sake of his privacy

Did you ever received his expressed permission to publish his real name on the article? (If that's his real name). Wouldn't that be a breach of the Data Protection Act? Even when you're not in the U.K, I'm pretty sure some of the laws may be breached in some ways.

Couldn't we at least give him some respect to his right of privacy by not publishing his name without his expressed approval?

88.105.101.121 19:10, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

If there's a published source out there that reveals his real name, I say it stays. Frankly, I don't think his real name could have stayed in this article for this long without such a citation (see WP:BLP). Henrymrx (talk) 20:33, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
I just took a look through all the available online sources listed and couldn't find mention of his real name. If there's a reliable source that connects them there's no problem, but we really should find it. -- SiobhanHansa 10:54, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Well guys, if that's the way you're playing; then give it your best shot. I probably never reveal my real name to every reporters I talk to, nor would I leave a slight hint of a name in any text/video publications I would have produced. The name presented on this article "could" be my own name.... Maybe you guys got it wrong and it could be one of the aliases I use in case something like this happens. =)

Sooner or later, that proposed "real" name will be removed as it hasn't got any evidence to back it up.

Personally, I would prefer to keep my stage-life ENTIRELY separated from my personal-life.

Thank you very much for your attention, guys.

88.105.51.51 17:14, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Use of real/stage name

The article follows no discernable pattern on usage of "DeAngelo" vs. "Pagan". The other "is his name sourced?" stuff aside, can we pick one and stick with it? I am in favor of DeAngelo, just because it is a verifiable name attached to all of his publications. Are there other pros/cons to this? -Ich (talk) 08:40, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

I understand; as per WP:BLP#Privacy_of_names, and if previous comments were really written by the article's subject, we should leave out the real name. Problem is that there are enough official published sources to verify Eben Pagan's his real name (YouTube), so I say we stick to it.
thedarkestclear Talk 07:29, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
YouTube doesn't count as a reliable source. Do we have reliable independent sources confirming the same?xC | ☎ 07:37, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
I know, but in this issue, YouTube is a mere means, because it's an upload of DeAngelo's Get Altitude program DVDs. Check http://youtube.com/watch?v=k51vFkjtf3g, it is quite enough. In that Get Altitude program, he says "If you're a student of marketing, and particularly internet marketing, then you might know one of our businesses. That business is called Double Your Dating. (...) You might even know me by my pen name that I use there, which is David DeAngelo." I figure this is quite some proof already.
thedarkestclear Talk 07:50, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Unless there's some personal reason to reveal his real name, there's really no reason to. He has said it several times during seminars that he values his privacy and makes sure to separate his identities. It shouldn't be a big deal, respect the wishes...He's honestly done enough for the community (and without getting caught up in the politics/drama of it) to deserve that... -A

On a second level of discussion...I would hope he wouldn't give his real name in that second product since that would mean everyone would instantly merge him with the David Deangelo name. Just like the Christian Carter name, I'm sure it's just another name for a different identity (with good reason) and it'd be pretty inaccurate of the writers here to presume to have 'found out' his real full name.....that's bad 'journalism' (though it IS Wiki) to post an inaccurate real name....reflects poorly on the authors. -A

On the other hand, David DeAngelo (or whoever) has made himself a public figure. It's been pretty well-established that those individuals do not have the same right to privacy as ordinary folks. If we can verify his real name, he really has no right to complain. He put himself in the public eye. I would like to see something other than the YouTube video, though. If his name cannot be verified, it can be removed and replaced with a comment that "DeAngelo" is known to be a stage name. Henrymrx (talk) 06:08, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion of real name

In line with the request above, apparently from the subject of the article, and the guidelines in Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons, I have removed the subject's real name from the introduction. That it is his real name, I do not dispute, nor that it can be referenced. What I consider the issue here is whether it is important enough to include. There is an above post, apparently by DeAngelo, which asks for privacy. Even if there weren't, WP:BLP advises to presume in favour of privacy. I think that this is a reasonable request. -- Sasuke Sarutobi (talk) 13:12, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I see now what you were referring to in the edit comment. :) Silly me, checking the talk page afterwards instead of before. Anyway, doesn't really matter because look that was just an anon IP. Could have be anybody. Could have been you, could have even been me! lol (hint: it wasn't) Mathmo Talk 19:07, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Yes, it was an anonymous IP, but WP:BLP advises that editors presume privacy for the subject (See Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons#Presumption_in_favor_of_privacy). As far as I know, the subject uses the name 'David DeAngelo' in his seduction materials, not 'Eben Pagan'. As this is an article about 'David DeAngelo' and his 'Double Your Dating' business, I therefore contend that the name is an unnecessary detail. -- Sasuke Sarutobi (talk) 21:21, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
You're right, but we are talking about the character David DeAngelo, the stage name, which is no different person than Pagan other than nomenclature? DeAngelo is a stage name... Shouldn't it at least be mentioned?
thedarkestclear Talk 15:56, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Maybe we should leave his "real-name" alone. It's not like it's going to make the article any significantly better by putting an alias of "Ebens Pagan" at the start of it.
Is there any real or important issue why the editors should put that name up? Even though Mr. Deangelo never mentioned his "real name" in any of the publications? I thought Wikipedia's role is not to expose people (unless they done something seriously famous/something criminal).
Do we have to flush Mr. Deangelo out...?
What's there to prove this crummy name "Ebens Pagan" is his real name????
Shin-chan01 (talk) 15:42, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
There is significant proof, namely in his own publications. See #Use of real or stage name: in his Get Altitude program, which he presents as Eben Pagan, he uses the line "If you're a student of marketing, and particularly internet marketing, then you might know one of our businesses. That business is called Double Your Dating. (...) You might even know me by my pen name that I use there, which is David DeAngelo." It's not because it's a YouTube link, that it doesn't count: it's a DVD rip.
thedarkestclear Talk 16:20, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
I see you've avoided answering my other questions. Care to answer the rest?
Shin-chan01 (talk) 17:26, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
let this issue you have created die, for instance the link you gave to "Presumption in favor of privacy" does not at all apply here. It is talking about when really negative things are said about people, for instance if one radio jockey said Helen Clark is a cock sucking lesbian. Now it should be obvious we should not let an article on Helen Clark have a multitude of such quotes in it. Which is what they are referring to when they mention: "Basic human dignity". Likewise he is not famous for just one single event (saving 29 kittens from a burning barn or whatever), so that point doesn't apply either. Mathmo Talk 21:27, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Hmmm....for once, I'd have to correct you on that. I did NOT originally "created" this issue, I'm just merely answering and highlighting the issue (from whatever User:X....), before this sub-topic.
I suppose you could say the same thing to other users when one of them is trying to "revive it". I'll forgive you on that. ;)
As for the example on your alleged "lesbian", I am struggling to read your point, nor would I care what she does on her private life. I'll let the other users determine what she does to other men on her respective article...
Shin-chan01 (talk) 23:26, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
I'll leave the topic open on Mr. Deangelo's alleged identity to the rest of the Wiki-users, whenever they choose to carry on or not, determining how the article suits him best and to his own liking.
Shin-chan01 (talk) 23:26, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Redaction

To be honest, I think the material in this page has got out of hand. A lot of it is either uncited, bordering on adcruft, or both. Everything that is cited, stays. Everything that isn't, needs citing, or it's going. And if you think this is being harsh, it isn't. This is a biographical article (even if it is about someone who works under a pseudonym), and it's on Wikipedia. As such, that means it needs to meet the following three criteria:

Notice I said 'needs', not 'should'. WP:BLP and everywhere says this - Wikipedia is not a primary source, nor is it a soapbox, nor is it a rumour mill. It is an online encyclopaedia, and while anyone can edit it, it has guidelines for appropriate content. I'm going to start coming down on this page. Hard. -- Sasuke Sarutobi (talk) 22:06, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree completely that the article needs cleanup... Whether cited or not, the stuff in here is an inadequate survey, just like is Carlos Xuma's article, stolen and pitifully rewritten either from the book, or misinterpreted by a reader. But I think you should relax, nobody is going to hunt you down because you're coming down hard. Just work on the article, and I'll assist you with it, since it's pretty interesting to see his concepts in a very clear way.
thedarkestclear Talk 15:51, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Applying DeAngelo's methods for Homosexuals

Should a gay man follow DeAngelo's "cocky and funny" method to make themselves more attractive, eg what makes women find men attractive? Or should one focus on looking hot as men are much more attracted to looks than women and it's what you look like that appeals to men?Robauz (talk) 23:09, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

...

Look for some articles relating to gay--pickup artists? Although you have to note that gay-man can't attract another man who chose to be straight...so....

I don't think a person can persuade or force a man or a woman to change their desired sexuality that easily for that person's benefit.

I think you're on the wrong page. 88.105.17.66 (talk) 12:11, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

What you're asking is a timeless question compounded by an even more perplexing one. First you ask, What do women want? Obviously, this is the underlying principle behind all of the seduction studies. Secondly, you want to know what will make a man attractive to a man. In all truth, most seduction systems on the market today are designed for developing qualities for success in business, social situations, and other aspects of self-improvement; I'm sure some pickup artist will say that they are transferrable. I've noticed in The Game that Mystery revealed his older brother being gay. Other than that, I have no idea. You might want to stick with reading Allen Ginsberg. --PolskanPUA (talk) 22:44, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

In one of his newsletters, he does not address homosexual men, but he did address homosexual women. His method was about attracting women, heterosexual or homosexual. In one of his responses, he read a letter written by a lesbian who used his methods well. Another letter was about a guy who claims to have slept with a lesbian. I cant source any of it, just going off of what I remember reading. Arnabdas (talk) 15:59, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] quotes

"# I do not apologize for my desires as a man."

Isn't this from Ross Jeffries? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.55.18.164 (talk) 10:29, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] First sentence

I changed the first sentence, which I know somepeople will revert again and again:

It read: Eben W. Pagan[1], better known as David DeAngelo, is an American entrepreneur, author and dating advisor.

which I changed to:

David DeAngelo, whose real name is Eben W. Pagan[1], is an American entrepreneur, author and dating advisor.

Now, what the wikipedians who edited DeAngelo's page tirelessly forgot was perspective. It might be interesting for a few people to know what his real name is. It is deserving of mention considering that it is an encyclopedia article, but it is not important for any of the facts; the article is about his work as David DeAngelo, which is the reason his name is worthy of mention. Apart from a few whack jobs who think his real name is a well-covered secret that they uncovered and opened up to the public, there really is no demand, no reasoning, and no logical purpose to post his first name so prominently in the lead sentence. The source itself is not the most valid either. Seduction-Chronicles.net is not a mainstream newspaper, journal, or book publication. It is not bound by the same rules and laws, and I'm sure plenty of incorrect information can get to that site without prompt correction.

Therefore, I changed the sentence hoping that it would re-emphasize the facts and themes of the article.

--PolskanPUA (talk) 23:28, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RSD/Tyler Durden?

Have you considered adding RSD ot TD to the main seduction "gurus" list? (probably meaning the template? an article needs to exist first) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.205.39.3 (talk) 09:44, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

what guru list?! Mathmo Talk 10:06, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Create a Separate Eben Pagan Reference

My suggestion is to create a separate Eben Pagan article or at very least a reference if Pagan himself does not deserve an article by wikipedia standards. I actually have learned the guy is very highly regarded amongst internet marketers in fields of online advertising, copywriting, etc. Pagan gets about $20,000,000.00 a year in business, with DYD being ONE of many businesses he has. I have also heard Pagan on the phone talk about having businesses that give dating and relationship advice to men and women. It's all OR and can't be sourced, but again, just giving the info I have come across. Arnabdas (talk) 16:03, 30 April 2008 (UTC) Basically my point is that because he has multiple businesses, a separate article could be made for him if Pagan is worth noting. Then a subsection of David DeAngelo in that article, leading to this main article of DeAngelo. There is also a proposal of re-writing the lead as "David DeAngelo is the stage name of online marketer Eben Pagan who gives advice on dating for men..." Arnabdas (talk) 16:06, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

the problem however is finding sourcing for the other businesses that he has, they are easy to find for DYD but I personally know very little of any of the others. Mathmo Talk 09:39, 1 May 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Wtf?

Why are all the seduction methods in the Cocky&Funny format? And why isnt this noted anywere, and is it made to look like it is completely obvious why this format is used? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.83.121.172 (talk) 16:54, 7 June 2008 (UTC)