Talk:Sam Hocevar

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

↓    Skip to table of contents    ↓

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Sam Hocevar article.
Article policies
This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:
Wikipedian An individual covered by or significantly related to this article, Sam Hocevar, has edited Wikipedia as
Sam Hocevar (talk · contribs)

Contents

[edit] Speedy deletion

I have no idea why this article should be deleted, the user placing the notice might not have properly read through the page. Sam Hocevar is going to become the Debian Project Leader, and all the other leaders have gotten biographical articles. keito 22:15, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia editors need to be especially careful that when they create articles about other Wikipedians, that all of the is are dotted and ts are crossed when providing proof of notability. BTW, when you use the hangon tag, you're supposed to provide evidence of notability, not just request that the article not be deleted. Corvus cornix 22:20, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Is this evidence enough for you? keito 22:28, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Is it multiple third-party independent notable references? Corvus cornix 22:29, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
So, are you saying I need several independent references to prove he's been elected as the next project leader? If the signed announcement made to the developers' mailing list wasn't enough, will then Debian's own vote result pages also not enough to prove who they've elected? keito 22:49, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
A link to the project's website is a primary source, not a reliable one under WP:RS. And even if it were a valid source, it's only one, not multiple. Corvus cornix 22:51, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

"Primary sources are documents or people very close to the situation you are writing about. An eyewitness account of a traffic accident published in a newspaper, and the White House's summary of a president's speech are primary sources. Primary source material that has been published by a reliable source may be used for the purposes of attribution in Wikipedia, but only with care, because it's easy to misuse primary sources. The Bible cannot be used as a source for the claim that Jesus advocated eye removal (Matthew 18:9, Mark 9:47) for his followers, because theologians differ as to how these passages should be interpreted. Edits that rely on primary sources should only make descriptive claims that can be checked by anyone without specialist knowledge."

I am still unable to see this conflicting with the policy, there was made no claim requiring any specialist knowledge to check. keito 23:05, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
That primary source only proves that he has been elected as project leader. It still does not indicate how having done so makes him notable. And it's still only one, and you haven't provided a single third party reference. Corvus cornix 23:16, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • I have removed the speedy deletion tag for the moment. However, the article badly needs reliable sources. If user Keito cannot find references to him in reliable sources in the next few days, it should be nominated again. This Google News Archive should provide some information. [1]
Some links:
Perhaps some info could be included about his work on wikipedia. There may not be much content now, but as DPL he's certainly notable. Jebba 15:30, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unsourced

I've added an unsourced tag to the article, since the sources are not reliable. Wikimedia, personal sites, the Debian site? There are no third party sources? Well, one, maybe, slashdot, but is that reliabe? Corvus cornix 17:43, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

A wikimedia page about it's own board members is certainly reliable. And why is the Debian site, especially when talking about it's own elections, not reliable? It's the most reliable site about the information, period. I see on your user page you have "I am not new to Wikipedia, despite my relatively short edit history. I got off to a bad start (although I was never blocked), and want to start over again. Consider this my new Wikipedia life." Seems to me you are off to another peculiar start, by speedy-deletion of the Debian Project Leader! Jebba 21:03, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Corvus cornix 21:35, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

I have re-added the unsourced tag, since there are still no reliable sources in this article. Corvus cornix 22:10, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I removed the tag since it has been demonstrated below that the current sources are reliable and that one cannot find better references than the debian website and sam himself. The article shows no POV sentences. You re-added the tag: I don't mind, but I believe you are of bad faith. jd 23:26, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Corvus cornix has added a comment to jd's talk page about this and citing WP:RS, which states: "Wikipedia:Verifiability says that any material that is challenged or likely to be challenged needs a source..." Is it really likely that that Sam Hocevar isn't the new DPL? Or a WikiMedia France board member? Or that he didn't write those programs? What exactly is it in the article you want sourced? Perhaps we should approach it like that. What in the article in particular do you want sources for? If a good source can't be found, then that sentence can be removed. Please make your objection more specific. For a short stub, it doesn't appear to be lacking sources to me. Jebba 06:38, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree to some extent. I'm sure there will be a book in the future about Debian where Sam will be in, but the fact is that this just isn't Britney Spears shaving her head bold, ergo it won't see much coverage in news media. The debian website is the most reliable source here atm. I'd like to see another source for the DVD subtitles thing, but unfortunately I don't think this was ever covered by any reliable source. It just didn't blip on the radar back then. Again, perhaps one day it will be in some book. 130.89.169.27 11:03, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia requires neutral third-party sources. Not one of the sources in this article meets that requirement. I will re-add the unsourced tag. Corvus cornix 19:03, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Corvus cornix, why isn't heise.de a neutral third-party? Or itwire.com.au? Also, wikipedia doesn't require a neutral third-party source in all cases: "Reliable sources are credible published materials with a reliable publication process; their authors are generally regarded as trustworthy, or are authoritative in relation to the subject at hand. The reliability of a source depends on context; what is reliable in one topic may not be in another." So for something like who won the Debian election, Debian is the #1 most reliable source for this info, and is appropriate to use. And again, what can be more reliable about who is on a wikipedia board than wikipedia itself? There is no need to go to another source for this info. As for the programs he's written, perhaps those aren't the best sources and could be removed from the article. Jebba 22:24, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

I must say I don't often edit on en: (I'm active on fr:, meta: and the foundation website) but this kind of behavior (Corvus cornix) does not make me eager to contribute here. I'll stay with the interwiki thing. jd 15:35, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Please read WP:ATT and WP:BLP. The sources on this page are almost all from debian. Are there zero newspapers or technical journals which talk about Sam Hocevar and give biographical information? Corvus cornix 22:27, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm started to be tired by this story, you first added a speedy delete tag on this article, then when rejected started to fight w/o any evidence with the sourcing problem, at least three different people reverted the unsourced tag, time to assume you're not of good faith :/ - phe 22:48, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Corvus cornix has put up the "unsourced" tag on this article 4 times now. Isn't there a three revert rule or something? I thought my approach of asking Corvus cornix to say what sentence in particular he objected to would be a good way to resolve this. Currently this 3 paragraph article has 8 sources: Heise, itwire, slashdot, ECP, along with one Debian URL. DEBIAN IS THE #1 MOST RELIABLE SOURCE FOR WHO WON THEIR ELECTIONS. PERIOD. I agree with Phe: "time to assume you're not of good faith". Jebba 22:55, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Whoa

You guys are nuts.

Sam Hocevar has been elected DPL. There's only one person who can tell you he's been declared DPL, and that one person is the Debian Project Secretary. There's a link to the project secretary's results mail a bit higher up.

If a new pope is elected, that person is immediately notable by virtue of being pope alone, even before he's done anything. By the same rationale, a Debian Project Leader is immediately notable by virtue of being DPL alone, even before he's done anything.

Yoe 20:05, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

[citation needed] Corvus cornix 20:06, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Yoe, we're not all nuts. I think the only person saying this is not notable is Corvus cornix, though now I think he's just arguing for more citations. I think the Debian site itself is a reliable source of information, especially about it's own elections. It's also Corvus cornix that added the speedy deletion tag.
Here's another story link about the election. There will likely be many more over the coming days, weeks, months, & year...
Jebba 20:55, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
I removed yet again the Unreferenced tag, with 8 ref for three small paragraph, please justify on the talk which assertion is challenged, before adding it again. - phe 15:48, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Listed on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies

Samuel Hocevar. No reliable sources. There should be some newspapers or tech journals which talk about him. The sources all seem to be from himself or from debian. Corvus cornix 22:49, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Obviously Corvus cornix after trying to speedy delete this article and failed try to fight now with this imaginary source trouble, at least three people reverted him, please apply 3RR on this article (as I don't know how :) - phe 22:55, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] A few words from Sam

Hi there. I just wanted to comment on a few things that may need to be added/removed/changed:

  • I am usually referred to as and mostly use the name "Sam" rather than "Samuel" (check Google: 400,000 hits vs. 32,000), I therefore suggest renaming the article to my most used name as per WP:NCP.
  • Though it is true that I was a Wikimedia France board member, I did not achieve anything really notable (apart from being a founding member or maybe helping with Wikimania) and there isn't even an article about Wikimedia France.
  • I did not "help" reverse engineer DVD subtitles, I just did it, but I am not aware of any external source to confirm this apart from copyright notices left here and there in third-party code.
  • There are many press articles about my distribution of DeCSS (http://decss.zoy.org/) and my involvement in VideoLAN : "Piratez comme ça vous chante", Libération (French national newspaper) 9 May 2001; "L'art du secret", Pour la Science (French magazine) 2001, "Procès DeCSS : la musique adoucira-t-elle le juge ?", 01Net (French magazine) 23 April 2001, "DVD-Piracy Paranoia Proves Counterproductive", The Washington Post 22 June 2003, "Ils crackent pour vous", SVM (French magazine) March 2007.
  • I wrote the WTFPL version 2.
  • The ecp.fr link that confirms I attended that school is about an award I got (IT prize for best internship) when I was working at the SNCF (French Railways).
  • I don't know what Corvus cornix's exact objections are, but I am pretty sure there is no need to have 4 articles about the same Debian election.

Best regards, Sam Hocevar 00:14, 26 April 2007 (UTC)