Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michel Bauwens


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result was NO CONSENSUS. Larry V (talk &#124; contribs) 12:31, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Michel Bauwens

 * — (View AfD)

Not notable - references point only to self-published, close or trivial blogs and web sites Backface 20:47, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

abstain (I am the nominator). Perhaps someone can find sources. Delete Having gone through the first 5 pages of Google stuff, I have not been able to find any solid RS. The impressive sounding P2P Foundation appears to be a self-published web site and there is plenty of OR around this across the web. Bauwens appears to be an impressive self-publicist having attached his name to a concept of P2P and being interviewed and quoted on all sorts of NN blogs and the like. Apparently he formed some dot.coms in Belgium at some point, although these appear to be dead and are not named anywhere that I can find. He is an impressive but NN college prof. So on balance and in the absence of any good firm sources, I have changed my opinion to Delete. Happy to see it stay if someone finds good solid sources. --Backface 11:56, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak keep 167,000 GHits. I would not like to see the article go without more convincing evidence of its irrelevance.--Anthony.bradbury 22:45, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak delete. I would not like to see the article stay without more convincing evidence of its relevance.  Emeraude 00:51, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. He's a well-known thinker among those who follow P2P developments (that's me). His works is widely read and cited (see the GHits). Also, even if it fails to develop, the P2P Foundation (and hence MB) are important first steps in the study of P2P. (BTW: which websites *aren't* self-published by some person or group?). --MarshallPoe 21:07, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Leibniz 16:53, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete ForrestLane42 00:44, 11 December 2006 (UTC)ForrestLane42 - not a well-known person, just seems like piling on more of Wilber or Wilber-like crew, Wilber deserves a page because of his well-known writings. This guy is irrelevant.
 * Keep per User:MarshallPoe, and the following. Bauwens is supposed to have written the screenplay for "TechnoCalyps", a video that is listed at IMDB and seems notable, although Bauwens is not credited at imdb. He has eight mentions in searchable Amazon books, 47 on Google Scholar, and six on Google books. Here is Bauwens' bio from Integral Review."Michel Bauwens has played a major role in the digital revolution of his home country Belgium, where he is known as an internet pioneer. He created two dotcom companies, was (eBusiness) strategic director for the telecommunications company Belgacom, and 'European Manager of Thought Leadership' for the U.S. webconsultancy MarchFIRST. He co-produced the 3-hour TV documentary 'TechnoCalyps: the metaphysics of technology and the end of man', and co-edited two French-language books on the 'Anthropology of Digital Society', and was editor in chief of the Flemish digital magazine Wave. He now lives in Chiang Mai, Thailand, where he created the Foundation for P2P Alternatives (P2PFoundation.net). He taught the Anthropology of Digital Society for postgraduate students at ICHEC/St. Louis in Brussels, Belgium and related courses to Payap University and Chiang Mai University in Thailand. He can be contacted at michelsub2003@yahoo.com" Furthermore, User:ForrestLane42 and User:Backface, both seeming single-purpose accounts of extremely recent vintage, have been working in tandem to nominate for deletion virtually all of the articles in the integral thought category. I wonder on what basis and with what familiarity with the subject User:ForrestLane42 says: "This guy is irrelevant." &mdash; goethean &#2384; 22:50, 11 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Rather off-topic comment: I really don't want to bang on about this here but Goethean's comments are not correct. I have no connection with ForrestLane42 and I certainly do not agree with his reasons for deletion above. I am a long-term reader, if not editor of wikipedia and an enthusiastic integralist. My interest here is to improve the quality of Wikipedia's coverage of Integral issues, much of which is currently quite poor. My chosen routes to doing so are by effective application of Wikipedia policy and the like so as to ensure that this area is addressed in an encylopedic manner and then beginning to improve the articles themselves. Much of these are not encyclopedic at the moment. Contrary to Geothean's statement, I support the inclusion of the vast majority of articles in the Integral Thought category, although many of them are not currently well-written. The few that I have proded are clear violations of notability. Anyway, this page is not about me, and I only write this to counter the comments above. I'll respond properly to these attacks elsewhere, if required. --Backface 00:02, 12 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment: Having said that, I am unsure that Goethean has provided any additional reliable for Michel Bauwens. None of the Amazon searchable books make non-trivial references, as far as I can see. Goethean's direction to a video on IMDB that Bauwens is "supposed to have written" (IMDB does not actually credit him) cannot be considered a reliable source. Ex-editorship of a magazine, minor teaching posts, a Foundation which appears to be a self-published web-site, dot.coms that cannot be sourced and a couple of other web-related jobs do not seem to create notability even in aggregate.


 * The Google video is posted by a close associate, James Burke, who is also listed on the 'who we are' of the p2pfoundation site. Integral Review is also problematic. Although it is a peer-reviewed, if minor, web journal (2 issues so far), Bauwens is listed as an editor of the first edition.


 * So after all that, I am still struggling to find any encylopedic, non-trivial, reliable sources for Michel Bauwens. As stated before, I am happy to see it stay if Goethean or others can find some. --Backface 00:02, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Comment Tom - if you have some sources that lead you be understand that Bauwens has some notability, perhaps you can provide them. If not... --82.35.193.80 08:58, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per Goethean. --Mallarme 07:26, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Has some notability. Suggest review in a few years. Stompin&#39; Tom 15:24, 13 December 2006 (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 a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.