Talk:Danny Sullivan (technologist)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Biography (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.

More Sources[edit]

If somebody would like to work on this article, here are a list of sources provided by the subject. Jehochman (Talk/Contrib) 16:14, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Engine trouble The Guardian, Sept. 5, 2002,7496,786350,00.html

For online shoppers, a sorry 'search' The Christian Science Monitor, July 22, 2002

AOL Replaces Overture With Google New York Times, May 2, 2002

Search engine upstart Teoma takes aim at Google AP, March 31, 2002

Your Search For an Engine Stops With Google Washington Post, Jan. 18, 2002

Seeking search engine perfection The Guardian, Jan. 17, 2002,7369,634553,00.html

Google sees profit in product images, Dec. 19, 2001

Striving to Top the Search Lists New York Times, Dec. 10. 2001

A simple thanks to mother of all search engines Chicago Tribune, Nov. 22, 2001 -- no longer online --

Google evaluates subscription options, Oct. 25, 2001

Cyber Law Journal: Invisible Publishing Sparks a Lawsuit New York Times, June 29, 2001

Paid Placement Is Catching On in Web Searches New York Times, June 4, 2001

A Search Engine Goes Beyond Google New York Times, May 17, 2001 Just Go, Already Forbes, March 13, 2001

Teacup Rescue Dogs Vancouver Village Voice, March 5, 2001

Search results becoming more commercial San Jose Mercury News, Feb. 15, 2001 -- no longer online --

The Search Engine as Crystal Ball New York Times, Feb. 5, 2001

The tricks that win clicks BBC, Jan. 22, 2001

Firms pay for search engine play AP, Dec. 11, 2000 -- no longer online --

Google Senses That It's Time to Grow Up San Francisco Chronicle, Aug. 25, 2000

In Search of Google Time, Aug. 21, 2000 -- no longer online --

The Search Engine as Cyborg New York Times, June 29, 2000

Lycos to hand off Net-search business Boston Globe, June 19, 2000 -- no longer online --

Google Searches For Success Forbes, May 2, 2000

Going Gaga for Google PC World, April 20, 2000 -- no longer online --

Helping Webmasters Land in Search Engines' Nets New York Times, March 23, 2000

That's Mr. Search Engine to You Wired, March 10, 2000,1282,34753,00.html

Search sites brush up on people skills USA Today, Jan. 24, 2000 -- no longer online --

Web search results still have human touch, Dec. 27, 1999

Google Keeps Search Simple New York Times, Oct. 6, 1999

Searches Where Less, Not More, Is Better New York Times, Sept. 30, 1999

Driving The Web Engines Newsweek, May 25, 1998 -- no longer online --

The Net Column The Guardian, Nov. 5, 1997 -- no longer online --


subject not notable -tags included.

Given the extensive list of sources covering this individual above, please explain exactly how the subject does not meet Wikipedia's notability criteria. If others agree, the tag can be restored - but you cannot tag an article that meets the criteria simply because you don't like them. --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 15:21, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
My impression was that the meaning of "coverage" in notability criteria was that the article (or a portion thereof) was actually about the subject, and not just quoting the subject. - Afiler (talk) 03:11, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
The motives of the person questioning notability need to be evaluated in the context of the subject's published narrative: --Openly (talk) 04:37, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
Actually, looking at the link provided in that post (, the rationale for the deletion of the former Jessie Stricchiola article would likely apply in this case too, i.e.: "She's quoted in multiple articles, but not much coverage about her per se." - Afiler (talk) 11:47, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
I recommend applying a small amount of WP:IAR and not doing a lengthy debate at this time, as it looks retaliatory for criticism (n.b. I'm not claiming anyone is acting in bad faith, but the appearance is of getting back at a critic). -- Seth Finkelstein (talk) 15:24, 25 November 2011 (UTC)


I removed the notability tag after the subject contacted me to complain. Having a Wikipedia page about somebody and saying "this person is a nobody" with a big orange message at the top is rude. If @Andy Dingley: or anybody else wants to nominate the page for deletion, that's fine with me, but the matter should be decided. We shouldn't keep Mr. Sullivan in the purgatory of having a biography that brands him "non notable". Either he's notable or he isn't. Jehochman Talk 12:56, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

I agree. Danny has been the singular voice of SEO and social media journalism for over two decades.. (note Before Social Media, possibly pre-wikipedia?) Can we end this issue.. also.. change technologist to journalist... I have read his writings for over two decades.. he isn't a gadget guy. Please. Thanks. I probably know more about him than any human not related to him. This is the Search Engine journalist equal to Dan Rather, Peter Jennings, Walter Cronkite.Talk [1]

Here are references.

Danny truly IS the journalist for a BILLION dollar industry... the first and the most credible.. if anyone is in wikipedia it should be Danny.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:53, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

  1. ^ http://steveplunkett.comv -me