The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Comment: The Orion Mystery received quite a lot of attention, but his co-author
Robert Bauval, who later teamed up with
Graham Hancock, seems to receive the majority of the credit. IIRC there was some media interest following the BBC’s being found unfair to their pareidolic theories about the Pyramids in a documentry, which was reissued to include their rebuttal. All in all Gilbert must have sold a few million books, but of itself that doesn’t seem to satisfy
WP:AUTHOR.—
Odysseus1479 19:37, 6 June 2016 (UTC)reply
He's published by Penguin who claim him as a
best-seller. There should be sources on him ... -
David Gerard (
talk) 21:07, 6 June 2016 (UTC)reply
A few points: I don’t see him mentioned at all in pages about the BBC controversy, just Bauval & Hancock, so apologies for the ‘garden path’. His 2012-Mayan-apocalypse work has attracted lots of blogging & user-contributed reviews, but no RS that I can find so far. His website went offline around 2011; I browsed a bit through the last useful Wayback Machine
capture in search of press links without finding any.—
Odysseus1479 22:40, 6 June 2016 (UTC)reply
Searching JSTOR turns up one slightly promising lead, if anyone has a subscription to the Atlantic: a review of the
January 2000 cover story (of which I can only see the title and tagline) briefly discusses his mention there, characterizing him as a “popular paranormalist”.[1] Also found: one brief, dismissive review in The Furrow, brief mentions in Folklore (on the
London Stone} and Isis (in a review of
Ed Krupp}, and listings in Science’s “Books Received”. Cites for these minor mentions available on request, if anyone thinks they might be useful.—
Odysseus1479 23:38, 6 June 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete as searches have found nothing better and there's nothing else noticeably convincing here.
SwisterTwistertalk 05:55, 10 June 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete without prejudice - he's someone there should be coverage of, but nobody's managed to find it and we really can't have a BLP without it -
David Gerard (
talk) 11:21, 10 June 2016 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
^Wiseman, James (2001). "Insight: Camelot in Kentucky". Archaeology. 54 (1): 10–14.
JSTOR41779598.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Comment: The Orion Mystery received quite a lot of attention, but his co-author
Robert Bauval, who later teamed up with
Graham Hancock, seems to receive the majority of the credit. IIRC there was some media interest following the BBC’s being found unfair to their pareidolic theories about the Pyramids in a documentry, which was reissued to include their rebuttal. All in all Gilbert must have sold a few million books, but of itself that doesn’t seem to satisfy
WP:AUTHOR.—
Odysseus1479 19:37, 6 June 2016 (UTC)reply
He's published by Penguin who claim him as a
best-seller. There should be sources on him ... -
David Gerard (
talk) 21:07, 6 June 2016 (UTC)reply
A few points: I don’t see him mentioned at all in pages about the BBC controversy, just Bauval & Hancock, so apologies for the ‘garden path’. His 2012-Mayan-apocalypse work has attracted lots of blogging & user-contributed reviews, but no RS that I can find so far. His website went offline around 2011; I browsed a bit through the last useful Wayback Machine
capture in search of press links without finding any.—
Odysseus1479 22:40, 6 June 2016 (UTC)reply
Searching JSTOR turns up one slightly promising lead, if anyone has a subscription to the Atlantic: a review of the
January 2000 cover story (of which I can only see the title and tagline) briefly discusses his mention there, characterizing him as a “popular paranormalist”.[1] Also found: one brief, dismissive review in The Furrow, brief mentions in Folklore (on the
London Stone} and Isis (in a review of
Ed Krupp}, and listings in Science’s “Books Received”. Cites for these minor mentions available on request, if anyone thinks they might be useful.—
Odysseus1479 23:38, 6 June 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete as searches have found nothing better and there's nothing else noticeably convincing here.
SwisterTwistertalk 05:55, 10 June 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete without prejudice - he's someone there should be coverage of, but nobody's managed to find it and we really can't have a BLP without it -
David Gerard (
talk) 11:21, 10 June 2016 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
^Wiseman, James (2001). "Insight: Camelot in Kentucky". Archaeology. 54 (1): 10–14.
JSTOR41779598.