Disputatio:David Misari Torpoco

Delenda?[fontem recensere]

Usor:Fjsalguero proposed deleting this page. It's borderline, but the author's two books about Latin really exist, so I'm inclined to think we should keep it even if German and English wikis delete it. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:24, 11 Augusti 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Usor:Andrew Dalby I don't argue that the books exist, but how relevant this person is. How many people are there that have written some law book?Fjsalguero (disputatio) 20:16, 11 Augusti 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And the proof that this is self promotion is that all the editors are puppets of the same user:[1]. Fjsalguero (disputatio) 20:21, 11 Augusti 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's a bad sign.

The possible point of interest to us is that he writes books about Latin. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:53, 12 Augusti 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Writing a book isn't a sign of relevance. How important are those books? Looking in Google " "El ABC del Latín Jurídico" misari" I only get 5 results, one from the editorial, one from the author's blog, one slideshare, an advertisement page and wikipedia.Fjsalguero (disputatio) 09:31, 12 Augusti 2016 (UTC)[reply]

According to his Facebook page, he'll be giving a free lecture on "Actualidad e importancia del Latín Jurídico" next Tuesday at 7:00 p.m. in the Auditorio de la Universidad Peruana de Ciencias e Informática (UPCI). About his book, he'll be explaining "las nuevas incorporaciones al contenido y el desarrollo de los dos capítulos nuevos sobre el "Orabunt Causas Melius" y la diferencia entre un aforismo, axioma y apotegma en el derecho." Legal distinctions among aphorisms, axiomata, and apothegmata could prove useful to know and might want to be incorporated into Vicipaedia's articles. Why not attend and send a report. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 11:04, 12 Augusti 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This might be his wikipedian userpage. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 11:20, 12 Augusti 2016 (UTC)[reply]

... if not his, that of a very close relative. Against him as a Latinist, I must say, is that his Latin requires severe correction. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:32, 12 Augusti 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So does anybody who gives a speech about latin deserve a wikipedia article? Isn't it strange to give a speech about Juridic Latin in a Computer Science faculty. That doesn't say much about how important he is.Fjsalguero (disputatio) 17:56, 12 Augusti 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Usor:Fjsalguero proposed speedy deletion today. The page is obviously self-promotion, and the author is obviously the subject -- surely that's never been in doubt. Let's discuss.

I must say that the page doesn't improve as it gets longer. I'm coming round to Fjsalguero's point of view. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:42, 19 Augusti 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, this person is a completely irrelevant assistant professor who is trying to use wikipedia to self promote himself, even using puppets like Sawada hersika, pretending to be a woman. I came in contact with this person when he tried to use wikiquote to promote his books and, once he was exposed while using the name Desiderius Megistus he started using puppeting in wikiquote, the English wikipedia and the German. Here you can see the Sockpuppet investigation result:[2]. It is a clear case of self promoting and bad faith.Fjsalguero (disputatio) 16:54, 19 Augusti 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the link. Let's see if anyone else comments. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:59, 19 Augusti 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There were no other comments. The main contributor has used multiple accounts without justification. The page lacks independent reliable sources, and this is unacceptable for a biography of a living person, so in accord with the above discussion I have now deleted it. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:20, 30 Novembris 2018 (UTC)[reply]