Talk:Steve Pavlina

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

Please rate the article and, if you wish, leave comments here regarding your assessment or the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

Articles for deletion This article was nominated for deletion on 14 July 2007. The result of the discussion was keep.

Contents

[edit] Vandalism

There's a lot of persistent vandalism happening to this article lately. I recommend temporarily locking it to stop this. Python (talk) 19:46, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

The reversion of the current article into a biased, POV dito is the real vandalism, as such an unbalanced article is in direct violation of Wikipedia's guidelines and statutes. It is not vandalism to claim something for which there exists adequate sources, nor is it not biased to inform unsuspecting victims of the criminal intent of a malicious scammer. 83.233.183.74 (talk) 20:06, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Let us try and talk things through, itemized.

1. The article affirms Steve Pavlina is an adherent of pseudo-science. Given the statements on his own website as to the nature of reality, this claim seems factual.

To be guilty of pseudo-science, you have to claim that the thing you are doing is science, he doesn't. Most things that people say on a day to day basis would be pseudo-science, if those people without scientific creditials would call them scientific. Brutha (talk) 23:34, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
The controlling factor is not whether the word "science" is mentioned, but whether explanation for events or situations are given that have other, unrelated, scientific explanations. Otherwise, anyone can avoid the label of "pseudoscience" by simply using a different word. While Steve does not use the word "science" per se, he does in fact claim to be describing reality. 78.96.82.26 (talk) 08:59, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
Shakespeare was also describing reality. There are still people who think that his description of the human condition is one of the best, but that doesn't make Shakespeare a pseudoscientist, because Shakespeare doesn't claim that his description have truth in an objective sense. Shakespeare is valued for providing a certain perspective to view reality. A lot of Steves writing is about using different perspectives to analyse reality. He doesn't claim that any of those perspectives are true in an objective way. Brutha 18:55, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

2. Article claims Pavlina is most well known for million dollar experiment. This is very difficult to establish, it could maybe read "well known for". The rest of the statements on the subject seem more or less direct quotes, and as such factual.

If I type "polyphasic sleep" "steve pavlina" into google I get 24,200 results, "million dollar experiment" "steve pavlina" gets only 899 hits, therefore more people know him for the polyphasic sleep stuff. Brutha (talk) 23:34, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Google doesn't seem to be a valid reference point according to the person protecting this article. I suppose if we don't use it one way we shouldn't use it the other eiter.78.96.82.26 (talk) 08:59, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
As I understand it the burden of proof lies with the person making a claim, not the other way around. Google isn't a good argument when you have to consider offline sources as well, but I think no reliable offline source mentions Steves million dollar experiment. Brutha 00:00, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

3. Article states that respondent bias is in favour of perceived success, and this stands to benefit Pavlina. This is factual.

4.Smear campaign, including spamming, is well documented. [1],[2],[3],[4] and [5] among other places.

In the internet everyone can register under any name on any website. Since writing PM's is allowed in some forums without verifying the Email Address, it is also possible to sent PMs from that forum account under Erin Pavlina's name. A attempt to attack a single low traffic website that is critical of him would hurt him a lot more than the website itself. I someone wants to attack a website there are far more effective methods than spamming from in ones own name. Someone who wanted to deminish Steves reputation would on the other hand have an interest to start a spam campain like that. Brutha (talk) 23:34, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
The attacked website seems to have comparable traffic, best I can tell. I never heard of forums allowing posting or using other features without confirming email address. And you'd sound a lot more respectable if you signed under your own name, Steve. 78.96.82.26 (talk) 08:59, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
The other site has an Alexa ranking of 205,113 while Steves website has one of 8,079. Quite a difference. According to compete.com Steve has had 133,883 visitors last month while the other site didn't have enough vistitors to have a ranking. While I'm not completely neutral I also someone different than Steve. Brutha 00:00, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

5. Felony grand theft is supported by Steve Pavlina's website, as well as public record.

The materials on Steve's website indicate that he was charged with a felony, but not convicted and that the day or two in jail caused him to start rethinking his life. The page cited says he was charged with a felony and spent time in jail but is silent on the matter of conviction. I don't know what public record says, but a reference to that was not provided as a source. --Irrevenant [ talk ] 09:10, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Removing these factual issues per se would constitute vandalism. Rewording may be more appropriate. Fluffygrrl (talk) 20:27, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

You are wrong about the removal of these points and others constituting vandalism. Please read the policies on verifiability, reliable sources, neutral point of view, original research, and biographies of living persons. -- zzuuzz (talk) 22:51, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Infobox

Steve Pavlina
Born April 14, 1971 (1971-04-14) (age 37)
Occupation Blogger, Public Speaker what else?
Spouse Erin Pavlina

Here's the Person infobox template. Fill it and move it to the article. CannibalSmith (talk) 08:48, 29 November 2007 (UTC)


Steve Pavlina would do himself a favor by providing some proof for his claims. Is that too much to ask? —Preceding unsigned comment added by MrHaney (talkcontribs) 06:45, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Notability

A couple of published references as to his notability.

As head of Dexterity Software:

  • Fast, cheap and everywhere - MSNBC, July 31, 2003[6].

As President of the ASP:

  • SOFTWARE; They Give It Away, Get Plenty Back - New York Times, June 13, 2001[7].

As a blogger and speaker on Personal Development:

  • Steve Pavlina, creator of the world's most popular personal development website, to join Las Vegas Convention Speakers Bureau - Yearbook of Experts (R) News Release Wire, November 15, 2006[8].
  • BLOGGING FOR DOLLARS SOME MAKE ENOUGH MONEY OFF SITES TO QUIT DAY JOB. - Daily News (Los Angeles, CA), October 29, 2006[9].
  • Rise and shine - The Guardian (UK) February 3, 2007[10]. (refers to his blog article on becoming an early riser).

Other - as an advocate of Polyphasic Sleep:

  • When sleep is just a dream : Overstimulated Americans struggle to get quality rest - USA Today, February 27, 2006[11].
  • Weekend: Mind: THIS COLUMN WILL CHANGE YOUR LIFE" - The Guardian (London) - Final Edition, GUARDIAN WEEKEND PAGES; Pg. 70 September 30, 2006[12].

All these notability references were sourced through Google News, which I understand to be good evidence of reputable sources. (Though I'm sure most are familiar with the New York Times, MSNBC and The Guardian).

[edit] Inaccurate content on locked article

{{editprotected}}

The following statement is inaccurate and should be removed or revised: Pavlina believes that objective reality does not exist, and that there is only one consciousness (the concept of subjective reality).

Mr. Pavlina has consistently positioned "subjective reality" as "one of many different lenses through which we can filter our perceptions." Mr. Pavlina has not denied the existence of objective reality. 69.242.85.126 (talk) 02:49, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Removed completely as no source was provided. --- RockMFR 01:00, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] He has ignored repeated requests to provide proof for this claim.

Who requested when the proof through which way of communication? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brutha (talk • contribs) 02:41, 4 January 2008 (UTC)


People have demanded proof on both his blog and on his forum. These people are always banned and the requests censored. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MrHaney (talkcontribs) 06:30, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

After http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:BLP you have to source a claim like this. I don't think that people got banned on the forum for asking for proofs. Which users are you talking about? Do you have an archive.org link to a post from a user like this?
We have relevant sources for the polyphasic sleep (The Guardian). With no evidence to the contrary having a neutral POV means reporting what the sources say about him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.178.44.253 (talk) 15:50, 10 January 2008 (UTC)