Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Sedat Laciner

Comments

 * Comment. In order to check his notability I just made a search on Sedat Laciner on some of the main ressources for social science: Jstor, containing more than 143.000 journal issues; ProQuest more than 6.000 periodicals, and SAGE Publications/CSA Illumina with +1,200 resources. Result: 0 hits on Sedat Laciner, neither as author nor as reference! Not having published anything or being used as reference in any respected journal nulifies IMHO any claim of notability. Bertilvidet 07:59, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree. I think that Laciner is mostly a celebrity in his own mind (one further inflated by him being crowned a Young World Leader (an poorly named title IMHO) for 2006.) Of course, there are also those 100,000 Google hits that show up when you type in his name, something which David Falcon (?Laciner?) also never ceases to harp on over and over. Those of course turn into 55 hits when one presses the "unique" button, almost all from his own page. I practically get 55 google hits for myself, that is no feat. The Jstor search was a very good one to do Bertilvidet, nearly all colleges use it and promote it to their students to be used when looking for scholarly articles to be used in writing papers. It is not surprising he does not show up in it. Laciner's claims to be a famous respected scholar with lots of books published are only supported by the fact he produces a paper and journal himself to publish those things. It seems Laciner is only in one industry, the industry of self-promotion by any means necessary. P.S.- I take back the Lambiam sock accusation, it was an incorrect one not based on further research. However it was clear there was some connection, and Lambiam has said he does read Laciner's paper. It was a misunderstanding that came out of the initial confusion of his staunch defense of Laciner that made it seem like sockpuppetry. However I have almost no doubt, as Fad(ix) has pointed out, that there are certainly socks afoot on this issue. Oops did I just make a pun? Vartan84 21:54, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Comment: One thing Vartan84 is wrong and another he is right. He is wrong in accusing Lambiam of being a sock, but he is right in that there is probably a sock here and the sock is probably David Falcon who I accuse to be Laciner. Sedat Laciner who registered three accounts. First an anonymous User:85.99.161.91 (talk â€¢ contribs) added Sedat Laciner's journal links to the Armenian Genocide article on here and here, he then has done the same thing for Armenia article here. He then visited the Anti-Semitism article and added materials linking Armenians and Armenia to anti-semitism pointing again to Laciner's hate site here and here and here.

One day later an account User:Slaciner (talk â€¢ contribs) started contributing on Wikipedia and continuing adding his journal link to various other articles as can be seen from his contribution page. On April 1 he stopped contributing with this login and the same day another login was created, User:Ankaram (talk â€¢ contribs), which continued where Slaciner left off. While Laciner isn't contributing under his registered logins there are sufficient evidences that suggest that he is involved under one of the new registered users, It would be relevent to note that after he realised that I was opposing him in April 17 he stopped contributing and on April 20, David Falcon continued where Ankaram has left. One has to pay a closer look at Falcon contributions to realise that he is indeed Laciner, like contributing particular articles Ankaram has created or also the fact that he contribute to materials which are covered in his own journal or like Ankaram and Slaciner adding Laciners journal in articles, here an example. 

If there is any notability of the persona Laciner is the whole affair serounding the Armenian girl who’s texts he has published and that while could not answer every revent materials, he left Holdwater the author of the racist site tallarmeniantale.com answer and published that guys work under pseudonym. This affair is as notable as the little notability Laciner has and if this article is voted to keep should be added since it appeared in a Courier which BTW one must admit is more known than his think thank pseudo-journal. Also, I find it relevent that the person who I accuse to be the sock of Holdwater, Deepblue06 comes in defense of Laciner article, the same Laciner who published Holdwater and claimed that he would publish even from someone called Mickey Mouse. Fad (ix) 06:02, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

The Armenians started an anti-Turkish campaign and they use Wiki as a platform for their accusations. They argue that me (David Falcon) is Dr. Laciner. Their only proof is that someone uses Sedat Laciner's name. But I do not think so that name of Sedat Laciner is not belong to Dr. Laciner. Anyone can create an account under the name of Laciner, or Einstein. If I create an account of George Bush would you believe that I am President Bush. Dr. Laciner is a director of a Turkish institute and he has many students and staff. He gives lectures and conferences in different universities and institutions. He visits other countries and again gives lectures. So anyone who knows or likes him could create an account under his name. And I am not sure whether he is aware of this 'hot' but 'dirty' debate or not. I think there is no direct connection between the Wiki Delete policy and Sedat Laciner title. The problem is Armenian Issue. Armenian users abuses the Wikipedia for their political aims David Falcon 07:46, 6 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Will you please cease from those racist comments!!!! These do indeed not contribute to creating an image of you as reputable and notable! Bertilvidet 08:15, 6 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Dear Laciner, I think you should read the evidence more carefully. What can be concluded from it is that Falcon, Ankaram and Slaciner are all the same user, and the IP too which trace at an Ankara provider. So, that claim you make that someone else registered under Laciner is baseless because this someone else would be you. You realised your mistake of registering Laciner, and then you got Ankaram registered and then this new login. Also, your allegations that Laciner did not register that account does defy logic. Why would someone not only pretend to be Laciner, but would also boost him here in Wikipedia? Someones pretention could only be in bad faith against Laciner not positive, and him boosting his credibility would not make much sense at all, since it can only be positive. That you have used any way of boosting yourself, by even editing Machael Jackson article and placing your link, or any article you can come accross doesn't make you any notable. There are various Turks that are much more notable than you and who have published in reputable journals who since they don't have your ego, don't go on to boost their credibility and gain some notability, and have no article about themselves. Fad (ix) 15:54, 6 June 2006 (UTC)