Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/What Men Know that Women Don't

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Articles for deletion

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 72.234.207.192 (talk) at 20:55, 6 October 2010. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

What Men Know that Women Don't

What Men Know that Women Don't (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is almost entirely quoted copyrighted text. I'm left with the distinct impression that this a promotional piece. Of the two WP:RS-looking sources, the Irish Times source is just a search for "Zubaty" and the Harvard Crimson source has only a few scant details about an apparent rally to promote an earlier verson of the book in 1995. The publisher, Virtualbookworm.com, likely falls under vanity press considerations.[1] An article on the author was deleted earlier this year. I believe this article fails to meet WP:NOTABILITY. — Scientizzle 20:48, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the article pic, File:Whatmencover.jpg, appears to have WP:COPYRIGHT issues.[2] — Scientizzle 20:54, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment In answer to your question, just some of the articles about feminists deleted via discussion, with an excerpt from the original article:

    AFD: JeeYeun Lee ("JeeYeun Lee is a queer theorist. She is an Asian-American Bi-sexual woman, who is indeed a feminist...")

    AFD: Carlin Ross ("Carlin Ross is a sex-positive feminist blogger and attorney...")

    AFD: Bridget Irish ("Bridget Irish ...is an American performance artist, lesbian feminist and Marxist...")

    AFD: Katherine Hanson ("Katherine Hanson is an American feminist. In the 1990s, she was the head of an organization known as the Women's Educational Equity Act Publishing Center...")

    AFD: Nina (poet) ("her poems discuss issues such as pregnancy, female liberation, racial equality...her poems attack and criticize sexual and societal mores and taboos, especially those associated with and promoted by Christians, (especially the Roman Catholic Church) conservatives, reactionaries, fascists, and even moderates and socialists who are not socialist enough...").

    Many more have been deleted via the Proposed deletion process or speediliy deleted as unambiguous advertising/no credibile claim to notability. Most of the original articles can be found on Deletionpedia. Voceditenore (talk) 09:33, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Do Not Delete Just for the record, any decisions to delete are NOT unanimous. Do not delete. Lew Loot (talk) 08:03, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Clearly fails wikipedia's notability requirements. To Lew Loot, nobody here is putting forth a bias for or against feminism or any other aspect of the book's content. What we are concerned with here is establishing whether the topic is notable based upon wikipedia's criteria for inclusion. I suggest you carefully read Wikipedia:Notability (books) which clearly explains what this criteria is. If you feal that What Men Know that Women Don't does meet this criteria, please make a statement to that effect here which explains your reasoning for that viewpoint.4meter4 (talk) 08:19, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy delete, see earlier discussions on this subject. Lew Loot, it does not have to be unanimous .. you really think that if you were the only vote to keep that then the consensus would be keep? --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:00, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • DO NOT DELETE We've been through this all before with the same cast of characters: Beestra, Voiceditnore. You people don't like the topic and want to see it banished. But this book meets sufficient requirements of for inclusion. It has been in print for 17 years in two different editions. Tens of thousands of men and women around the world have read it and hundreds have provided personal positive testimonials as to its value (which you won’t accept as verification of notability). It’s simply the BEST BOOK ABOUT MEN ever written, with Susan Faludi’s “Stiffed” coming in a close second. Hundreds of copies have been stolen from libraries by feminists who do not believe in free speech. Leo Tolstoy and Mark Twain self-published because any writer with a following knows that by self-publishing you can keep your book in print indefinitely, rather than having it go into remainders after three months. What kicked this episode off is that Zubaty was just interviewed by a writer for the Globe and Mail in Canada so we prepared this page thinking we would have a sufficiently large and current cite to accompany the Irish Times, and the Harvard Crimson...and then editors at that paper sliced out any mentions of Zubaty for political reasons...but we decided to go ahead and submit this book page anyway with Svoboda’s online book review. Your methods are classically feminine. You do not like the topic, have decided it does not belong on wikipedia, and now are lurching around looking for ways to justify that decision. It’s all in the book. You’ll delete it, like you did Zubaty’s personal page, despite the fact that it qualifies in every way for inclusion. But word is getting around that though wikipedia safely handles any safe topic, it allows itself to be bullied by the tyranny of the majority on anything controversial. Well, good luck with your uncyclopedia, aggregator of popular knowledge that can be found on line. You are like the Popular Mechanics of intelligent thought. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.234.207.192 (talk) 15:35, 5 October 2010 (UTC) — 72.234.207.192 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

what Men know about hypocrisy I asked you Voceditenore what your name is and where YOUR book is and you refuse to say. This book has been in print for 17 years, has sold 25,000 copies worldwide, received hundreds of personal letters and emails noting it's valuable contributions to gender issues. In the last 17 years I have done over 200 radio shows on this book and its’ men’s topics. In the last six months youtube hosted 19,000 downloads to 40 different countries of the What Men Know That Women Don't video. It’s been reviewed by the Irish times and the Spokane Spokesman, numerous online reviewers, and I, as it s author have been mentioned in the Wall Street Journal, the Harvard Crimson, Transitions Men’s magazine, the Chicago Sun-Times, the San Francisco Chronicle and numerous other men’s publications and some feminist publications. The Sterling Institute of relationship wikipedia page uses it as a cite for their men’s organization. But though it is the best book ever written in human history about MEN, but because it is despised by feminists, it is blacklisted in most main stream media. No...you have already decided to delete this page. You are just looking for justifications. No one here is looking to improve the article. Your snap judgments revolve around how few libraries have the book when hundreds of copies have been stolen from libraries by feminist harpies who have no love for free speech. You are arrogant and prejudiced and the only reason I’m writing this is because I want it archived. Lewis worked hard putting this together and you have no business deleting this. Rich Zubaty — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.234.207.192 (talk • contribs)

No one wants to improve the article, because it does not meet Wikipedia's guidelines on notability. If you are, indeed, the author of this book, then you have a conflict of interest. It doesn't matter how many radio shows you have done to promote this book, or how many downloads on YouTube it has, it is not notable. Eagles 24/7 (C) 20:11, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

17 years of notability This book is notable to tens of thousands of people who have some appreciation for men's issues which clearly is none of you. While I spend my days fighting against war and fighting corporate greed, you spend your time cruising around anonymously looking for preoccupied worker bees like me to victimize. There's a word for that. This book has sold small amounts every month for the past 17 years and has appreciable amounts of notability as stated above, and nothing you imply is going to eliminate that. As I said, Lewis worked hard on this and I can't believe you hypocrites are going to delete him again. That’s why I’m coming to his aid. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.234.207.192 (talk) 23:13, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Zubaty, you are going to need to prove that this book meets Wikipedia's notability guideline for books. Just asserting its notability by vaguely saying that thousands of people have bought it (along with your usual incivility and personal attacks) is not going to cut it. Also, please stop pretending that Lew Loot isn't you. Eagles 24/7 (C) 00:02, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Article author Lew Loot has been previously chastised on his behavior regarding a prior attempt at "establishing" the notability of Rich Zubaty & his self-published works.

Back in May, his incendiary remarks during the AfD debate warranted deletion of his comments. He's most recently been warned about posting remarks in this current article's discussion page without proper user-tagging.

I see now that Rich Zubaty himself has "signed" a comment from the previously anonymous IP 72.234.207.192. Mr. Zubaty's edits to this and prior related articles violate WP:NPOV & WP:COI.

Wikipedia is not the proper forum for him and other Zubaty "fans" to garner free advertising for his books and website. DennisDallas (talk) 02:59, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete I can't find sufficient reliable sources to support the assertion of notability for this book. And if I were the author, I'd spend a little more time tracking down links to reviews and other coverage in reliable sources to establish notability, and a little less time insulting the editors here, since only one of those activities is likely to keep the article from being deleted. If you've gotten reviews in the Wall Street Journal and the Chicago Sun-Times, for crying out loud, post some links to them here! Or if not links, at least dates so we can look them up. Demonstrating press coverage of your book is a much, much better use of your time here if your goal is to keep the article. 28bytes (talk) 03:34, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitrary break

  • LOTS MORE CITES

Thank you 28bytes, for showing a sincere interest. You are the first one. If you will be kind enough to show us HOW to present this information, we will follow your advice to the T.

..................................

First off, Lew is in Luxembourg. I am in Hawaii. We are NOT the same person. He is one of the thousands of people who read my book, got a lot out of it. and wants to help.........

ANY ONLINE SEARCH FOR THE BOOK SHOULD INCLUDE BOTH NAMES........

Surviving the Feminization of America (original name 1993) What Men Know That Women Don't (2003)

same book, two editions......... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.234.207.192 (talk • contribs) 05:57, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks, Mr. Zubaty, for providing those links. I can't promise they'll tip the balance of the discussion towards keeping the article, but that's certainly the right approach to take in advocating for the book's notability. 28bytes (talk) 06:28, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Summary of the information/links provided at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/What Men Know that Women Don't:
    • Mentions of Zubaty in 3 articles by the same author in the opinion section of The Irish Times, including one which reviews both his book and a play by another author which begins: "I want to mention two artistic works from last year, each in its own way obscure, which, by virtue of being overlooked, indicate the kinds of discussion we seek to avoid." [7] (Link currently in article and has never been removed)
    • A brief article in the Harvard Crimson describing a demo organized by Zubaty where he was publicizing his book [8] (Link currently in the article)
    • Text from a non-available article in the Wall Street Journal which appears to basically quote this article in the Cornell Sun, but adds: "The paper, however, misses another Zubaty tome, What Men Know That Women Don't, described on his web site as 'the book that unshames men and frees your brainwaves for recovery from Feminism'."
    • A reprint of an article by Zubaty (but not about him or his book) which originally appeared in The Washington Times. [9]
    • An article by Zubaty (but not about him or his book) which originally appeared in the Chicago Sun-Times Commentary section, October 29, 1994 (reprinted here)
    • Notes on "What Men Know That Women Don't" by Lion Kimbro on Kimbro's self-published website. Lion Kimbro's Wiki [10] in which Kimbro says that he has not actually read the book. The notes are based primarily on Svoboda's review on another "open contribution" website, mensactivism.org [11] (already linked in the article)
    • Excerpt quoted from a web site "Brother to Brother Culture Comments" (no link provided and I could find no trace of the web site)
    • Apparently interviewed with others in "Peace Accord Will Women and Men Ever Learn to Resolve Their Differences and Just Get Along?", The Spokesman-Review, October 23, 1994 [12], although it's behind a subscription wall, so I don't know what it says.

Other reliable sources which I've found (although all but the Male View and possibly the Culture Wars) are extremely brief mentions of either the book or Zubaty:

  • A 1999 review of Surviving the Feminization of America from Male View (ISSN 1361-1968). The magazine is no longer published. The article can found at Highbeam Research, to which I have subscription access.
  • Culture Wars (magazine), "Selling Contempt", Ultramontane Associates/American Center for Law and Justice, Vol. 20, 2000 (only snippet views, but looks like it might deal substantially with Surviving the Feminization of America)
  • Kaye, Miranda; Tolmie, Julia, "Discoursing Dads: The Rhetorical Devices of Fathers' Rights Groups", Melbourne University Law Review, April 1998 (Zubaty's article, "Reuniting Fathers with Their Families" in the Washington Times cited in a footnote)
  • Klein, Ellen R., Undressing feminism: A philosophical exposé, (Series: Paragon Issues in Philosophy), Paragon House, 2002. ISBN 1557788111 (Surviving the Feminization of America p. 61 cited in a footnote)
  • Boyd, Susan B. et al.. Reaction and resistance: feminism, law, and social change, University of British Columbia Press, 2007. ISBN 077481411X (brief mention of Zubaty as one of 9 authors whose writings are derivative of works published in the 70s and 80s and footnoted to What Men Know That Women Don't)
  • Ducat, Stephen, The wimp factor: gender gaps, holy wars, and the politics of anxious masculinity, Beacon Press, 2004. ISBN 0807043443 (brief analysis of the cover image of Surviving the Feminization of America)
  • Parke, Ross D. and Brott, Armin A. Throwaway dads: the myths and barriers that keep men from being the fathers, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 1999, ISBN 0395860415 (brief mention of Surviving the Feminization of America under the heading "New Misogynists")
  • Preston, John, "Blast those dungarees", Sunday Telegraph, 30 January 2000) via Highbeam Research (brief mention in a review of an episode of the BBC2 programme, Counterblast: "After 15 minutes, however, he was starting to run out of steam. He'd already called on the services of a like-minded American with the unlikely name of Rich Zubaty, described simply as "an author", who provided the usual array of meaningless statistics that these occasions demand. "Did you know that 19 out of every 20 people who die on the job are men?" Rich announced, at which George could only shake his head and mutter "Middle-class dykes", in a distracted sort of way."
  • Goodman, Marshall Rockford, Karla Marx, lulu.com, 2008, ISBN 0557002966 (a self-published book, so very marginally a reliable source, but has a quote from What Men Know that Women Don't)

I had originally provided the above sources (apart from Male View) at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rich Zubaty. Note also that the Mens' Studies Press (founded in 1992) publishes five peer-reviewed journals, one of which is the journal of the American Men's Studies Association. I searched all five journals from 1992 to the present for "Zubaty" and could not find a mention. I also searched "Zubaty" in their 2008 International Guide to Literature on Masculinity: A Bibliography with zero results. Voceditenore (talk) 12:28, 6 October 2010 (UTC) Additional sources added by Voceditenore (talk) 14:29, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • MORE CITES

Thank you to Voceeditnore for this collation. Too bad so many of the cites I noted are missing from it. I recommend everyone who intends to vote on this looking over the entire body of evidence I presented. Furthermore, I find it remarkable that she wishes to start a list of all the places I am not mentioned. Feminism is not monolithic and neither is men's studies. There are factions and they fight with each other. Mythopoetic, men’s rights, father’s issues, circumcision and on and on. Moreoever, there are no men’s studies programs at any university in America and no degrees in such, therefore there are few publications and little literature and no academic support. Most of the best writing in this field has been by non-academics. Saying that What Men Know That Women/Surviving the Feminization of America has nothing to say about men’s studies is like saying Gone with the Wind has nothing to say about the ante-bellum South. At some point the academic statisticians have to just stand back and take it in............


Here is what was said about me by one magazine editor in the last wiki deletion episode:.......

_______________________________

Beginning of message copied from Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rich Zubaty

Do Not Delete I was involved in the publishing of Transitions, the newsletter of the National Coalition For Men (ncfm.org) for over 10 years, including 4 years as chief editor. Some of our past issues are archived at (http://www.californiamenscenters.org/transitionsbrown.html). NCFM is an educational organization that examines discrimination against men and boys. I can assure you that Rich Zubaty is notable in the field of men's issues. As evidence of this, we printed an excerpt of his book "What Men Know That Women Don't" in the Nov/Dec 2000 issue of Transitions. We printed a review of his book "The Corporate Cult" in the March/April 2002 issue, and a news article about his internet podcast in the Jan/Feb 2006 issue.
Wikipedia should consider that the field of men's rights does not get a lot of attention, for various political reasons. That Zubaty was able to earn the list of references that have been provided in this discussion should be seen as a noteworthy accomplishment. Many of the references are from web sites related to men's issues, but many are not, including the WSJ and The Harvard Crimson. As men's issues is still a growing field, many of our references will come from sources with an interest in the subject.
For verifiability, all you need to do is go to Amazon and see that his books are for sale. The content of Zubaty's writing is not in question; the article simply states that he wrote those books. They are available and the sales have not been insignificant.
The article does need to be improved, and this can be done once this case is settled. Jwleath (talk) 03:03, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

End of copied message

_______________________________

I am sitting back here pretending that this is all hapening sensibly. But this is how I was lulled into deletion last time. Voceeditnore led the charge to delete me last time. And she’s doing it again, all the while feigning objectivity. Unless one of you administrators comes forward to challenge her attempts to “organize” this information, this effort on behalf of fair treatment for men will be all for naught. Her very first move was to delete any and all references to the Waters/Irish Times articles. My strongest cites. Just wipe them out before anybody saw them. This is not above board behavior. The Brits have a great tradition of politely and patronizingly tearing people apart. I have never considered that civil in any sense. It’s the epitome of rudeness. I’m doing my best to rein myself in, but I don’t want anyone else to be lulled into believing this is all moving along nicely and sanely now. There has been a great emphasis on where I do not appear, and no research from you administrators on where I DO appear. WE don’t have the search tools you have.

Also, edited out of the above collation is mention of the 200 plus radio shows I appeared on including CFRB Tonornto, WGN Chicago, Australian Broadcasting Company Sydney, and Perth, and hundreds more in New York, San Francisco, Los Angeles and across Canada, which had a particular hunger for what I had to say when the book first came out in 1994. Also TV: Montel Williams, CLTV Chicago, Morton Downy Jr. and others – all of these devoted to examinations of the newly published Surviving the Feminization of America. Someone has the search tools to find those and it does not do us justice for them to be buried off in some other file held somewhere else offline. Voceeditnore sabotaged me once before, and I’d be a fool to think she will not do it again. While pretending to be polite and diligent and objective, she is ignoring evidence (like my electronic media and San Francisco Chronicle exposures) and floating sly insinuations about how I do not appear in emasculated academic publications. Not kosher.72.234.207.192 (talk) 17:26, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure why you think the Irish Times reference was hidden, it's right there in the list, and in the article too. And for the record, Wikipedia doesn't give us any special search tools when we sign up for an account here; we use Google just like everyone else. 28bytes (talk) 17:39, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
For the record, at no time did I remove any of the links to the sources. I removed copyright infringing text only and left the links to the sources. [13] The article created by Lew Loot consisted of pasted-in verbatim chunks of copyright material from this source which had to be removed per WP:COPYVIO. Likewise, the excessive verbatim quote from The Irish Times which exceeded the fair use limits for non-free text. I cut the quote down but left the link to the reference. I had warned Lew Loot about this when he had first created the article in the Sandbox and provided links to the relevant guidance pages on his talk page. I strongly urge both Mr. Zubaty and Lew Loot to read those guidance pages. Voceditenore (talk) 17:48, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Here is the one column by Zubaty in the San Francisco Chronicle [14] that I could find. It was in the "Open Forum" section of the paper. However, it is a piece written by Zubaty, not about him, and does not attest to the significance of What Men Know that Women Don't. Mr. Zubaty may not like the criteria at Wikipedia:Notability (books), but those are the ones that he will have to work with if he wants the article kept. Voceditenore (talk) 18:11, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Here is the place where Voceditenore completely removed the John Waters Irish Times material referring to it as a failed verification when in fact it is a link to THREE Irish Times mentions of me and my book.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=What_Men_Know_that_Women_Don%27t&diff=388768204&oldid=388765475
We have already been through the rigmarole about how I am not a notable person. Fine. But my book has been a notable book for 17 years. That’s how I got on vast amounts of electronic media and got to write articles for the Sun-Times and San Francisco Chronicle and many others. The book is my credential. No one gets to write for those kinds of publication just because he “wants to”. You need a passport. An acknowledgement of notability. A book. This book took four years to write.
Here is the wiki criteria
The book has been the subject[1] of multiple, non-trivial[2] published works appearing in sources that are independent of the book itself,[3] with at least some of these works serving a general audience. This includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, other books, television documentaries and reviews. Some of these works should contain sufficient critical commentary to allow the article to grow past a simple plot summary.
We meet this criteria hook line and sinker and have met it for over a decade. There is no way that this criteria can be employed to delete this book, except by extreme prejudice of some wiki editors. If I was a feminist we would not even be having this discussion.72.234.207.192 (talk) 19:25, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know why you persist in claiming that I removed the link to the Irish Times articles. Look in every single version that I edited [15], [16], [17] [18], and the link to all three articles in The Irish Times is always there. I merely removed the excessive quotation of non-free text and the copyvio. Voceditenore (talk) 19:49, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
How could it not be you? SOMEBODY removed the John Waters text and link entirely and that change, as shown in this link: ....... http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=What_Men_Know_that_Women_Don%27t&diff=388768204&oldid=388765475........ was recorded in a Voceditenore edit. So, ignorant as I am, what else would I conclude? I opened Lew’s original page after you had been there and all mentions of Irish Times, John Waters, and the link to the Irish Times were deleted. I MYSELF had to put those back in, which is WHY they are there NOW! I linked the NEW footnote to a single page/article at the Irish Times rather than the previous linked Irish Times search page that listed all THREE of the mentions of Rich Zubaty and What Men Know That Women Don’t. Frankly I am amazed you continue to claim you didn’t erase that stuff when the evidence is recorded in that link. Am I failing to understand something? I don’t think so. Your begrudging attempts to find cites only when your nose is pointed right at them displays an utter lack of objectivity or willingness to help. You have the search tools to find hundreds of mentions of me and my books over the past 17 years, and you won’t do it. That is not kosher. 72.234.207.192 (talk) 20:55, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/What_Men_Know_that_Women_Don%27t&oldid=389171592"