Talk:John Reed (novelist)

This article was preserved after a vote for its deletion. See its archived VfD entry for details.

Unsourced quotes

This article is full of unsourced quotes, and was written by one of Reed's many fake identities, User:Lyltry.[1][2] What do we do about this?
Also, is Wikinews considered a reliable source on Wikiquote?[3] I would say it shouldn't be, but wondering about the practices here.Proabivouac 00:05, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

I would say that it should be deleted as John Reed's personal spam, and unworthy of being included in Wikiquote. Jonas Rand 20:54, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Try moving a VfD and see what happens, Madam!--80.168.13.194 10:48, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Re your edit:[4]

There seems to be some confusion as to what constitutes a "sourced" quote. I was under the impression that we're looking for third parties to establish that a quote is notable. Here we have an author going through his own books and deciding which of his own quotes are memorable enough for inclusion in Wikiquote. I have no reason to think his self-quotes inaccurate (though who knows, given his track record of deceitfully manipulating social media,) but I don't think this counts as "sourced."Proabivouac 03:42, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

The quotes are "sourced." For sufficiently notable works, editors generally exercise considerable latitude in selecting passages they consider quotable. You may be right about the quality of the selections, and I have my doubts about the quality of the works, but I am not sure wholesale deletion is justified. ~ Ningauble 18:25, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

It is alleged that the article was written by Mr Reed, although no proof is offered. Yes, User:Lyltry edited the article and made no other edits, but that proves nothing, nor did he/she start the article. Be that as it may, sourcing quotes to a particular published novel is valid sourcing. I can find no policy that a third party is necessary to establish that a quote is notable. However, in the interests of avoiding disputes I, as a third party with no connection whatsoever with Mr. Reed, have chosen to insert some sourced quotes. I am sure that nobody will want to remove properly sourced quotes.--Novelreader 12:56, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

This is not merely an allegation, but well-substantiated truth. "Lyltry" is a fake identity that was used by John Reed himself, along with (to my recollection), "Profgregory", "Huckandraz", and "Easyreeder", among others. These personalities appeared on the literature-oriented site LibraryThing and the Wikimedia group of sites, and they were created by John Reed to promote himself. He also uses IP addresses, one of which is possibly 80.168.13.194 above. Reed's deceptive antics were perpetrated to manufacture opinion and increase the popularity of his books. This chicanery involved using female names, fake MySpace pages promoting the books, etc. See:

• http://www.myspace.com/huckandraz
• http://www.librarything.com/profile/Huckandraz
• http://www.librarything.com/profile/profgregory
• http://www.libraryhing.com/profile/easyreeder

--Jonas Rand 19:08, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Oh, and this is even more appalling. From his profile as 'Huckandraz', the "32-year-old female":

"Huck & Raz's Interests...Books... Snowball's Chance and The Whole by John Reed"

Manufacturing opinion (see reviews by "Hollos", "lyltry", "Huckandraz"): http://www.librarything.com/work/609461/reviews

Huckandraz manufacturing support: "This is absolutely the masterpiece of that moment."(May 17, 2007) --Jonas Rand 19:22, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

I also just realized that "Novelreader", in addition to sounding a lot like "Easyreeder", has only ten contributions on this site, the first of which was an edit to the John Reed (novelist) article, and the second of which was an edit to this talk page. There are no other accounts on any Wikimedia project with this name. Who are you? Jonas Rand 19:29, 18 February 2010 (UTC)