Talk:Daniel Ben-Horin

This article was nominated for deletion on 27 September 2017. The result of the discussion was keep.

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Politics and Government

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance).

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE.

GlennHirsch (talk · contribs) has been paid by TechSoup.
Alicjapeas (talk · contribs) has been paid by TechSoup.

February 2015[edit]

Daniel Ben-Horin's original page has 36+ citations to reputable international publications, newspapers (including The New York Times) and several books establishing this individual's accomplishments and reputation as an innovator in the field. The Huffington Post, for example, is such a publication, not just a "blog," as is the Stanford Social Innovation Review. The stature of the international nonprofit this individual has founded is also demonstrated. Whether or not I personally am acquainted with this individual is irrelevant as the facts and citations speak for themselves. The description in the article does not use 'pr' language or 'puffery,' as you state, but simply states the facts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Glennhirsch (talk • contribs) 20:32, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Glenn. I made 15 edits to this article, and for only one of them did I refer to blogs, and for only one of them did I refer to "'pr' language or 'puffery.'" Yet you mass reverted all 15 of my edits, including the tags I added, which isn't productive. If you disagree with specific edits, please raise the issue(s) here are we can address them one by one. (And don't remove tags until they're resolved.) To get things started I'll address two issues that I understand you to be raising:

Stehle quote: I called this quote "puffery" and removed it on neutrality grounds because it seemed undue. Generally, the fact that a subject won an award may be noteworthy, but the praise that the subject received during the awards ceremony is generally not noteworthy. People giving awards say all sorts of complimentary things; we can't include a quote for every award given to every awardee.
Huffington Post and Stanford Social Innovation Review: The fact that the subject blogs on these fora may be noteworthy. I'm restoring those bits. However, links to Ben-Horin's specific blog posts are inappropriate. Generally, Wikipedia's yardstick for noteworthiness/notability is coverage by independent reliable sources.

I hope this helps. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 06:20, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Daniel Ben-Horin. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 15:10, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Daniel Ben-Horin. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://ashoka.org/newfellows
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nptimes.com/07Aug/070801Special%20Report.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:47, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Redirected to TechSoup Global[edit]

I have redirected the article to TechSoup Global as this is essentially WP:BLP1E. I would be glad if someone could show me otherwise. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 08:44, 2 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the blar. I've gone through a recent re-write of this article that was submitted by a COI editor, with lots of refs, and this SFGate article was the only independent reliable secondary source I could find with anything significant about Ben-Horin. Unfortunately, there really isn't much in there of biographical relevance. It's just him talking a bit about TechSoup. I do not think he should have a standalone article. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 04:13, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@DrFleischman: I agree with you that there isn't much biographical relevance and it's a weak case as a biography. Where I disagree though is that this is a BLP1E. He seems to be mentioned or referenced in a fair number of books for both journalism/his writing [1], [2] and his main work, he is cited here for instance [3] as being instrumental and working with the head of google. Sources like [4] have more than just a passing mention, and people who are totally not notable don't tend to get that in books. I suggest you take it to AFD (in the cut/altered version) and let the community decide and give a fair decision on what to do with it. I certainly don't think it is a clear cut keep, but I don't think we can ignore the amount of coverage he has in books either. It may be that the community decides to document a bit of info in main article so we should respect whatever is decided.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:50, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I looked through those sources and I don't see anything that would make it into an encyclopedia article, at least not one about him, beyond the fact that he founded CompuMentor. I'll start an AfD. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 18:36, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what to make of the AfD. It was closed as keep with the express caveat that it did not foreclose a merge. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 23:26, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Merge" at XfD is a form of "keep", when merging the page history should be preserved for attribution (see WP:merge and delete for more info) so the outcome of the AfD was, in a nutshell, that no pages get deleted. Merging is an editorial decision that can be made in article talk space, outside of the deletion process, so I suggest continuing that discussion here. – filelakeshoe (t / c)  23:46, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]