Talk:Eddie Tabash

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

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

Skepticism Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Is this guy notable?

There is no evidence on the article that this guy is notable. Can anyone expand to demonstrate this? NBeale 07:49, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

From what I've been able to gather, as a chairman with the Council for Secular Humanism, as well as a frequent speaker at several universities on the subjects of secularism and atheism, I would say it's more than reasonable to assume that Eddie Tabash is notable enough to warrant his own article. Expansion is certainly needed, but I don't think that article length warrants a VfD in any case.

However, I do have concerns that your questions on this matter are motivated more by, possibly, a desire to see an article on a secular humanist removed than actual questions on Eddie Tabash's notability. 76.18.140.105 22:58, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Given that he has participated in several important debates, has run for public office and participated in politics in other ways, has written numerous articles, and continues to be engaged as a public speaker, I think he is noteworthy enough to deserve a separate article. Since five months have passed since the NBeale originally tagged the article and nobody has supported his skepticism in that time, I have boldy gone ahead and removed the tag. I do agree that some additional references would be good, but frankly I've seen much more egregious examples of vanity bios on wikipedia than this one. --Randall Nortman 17:34, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rewrite

Going to attempt to give this page a make-over and clean it up. Hopefully will be done in the next couple weeks. If you have something you would like on the page, please leave it here on TALK and I will update it.Sgerbic (talk) 03:46, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sticking a fork in it as the page is done as far as I'm concerned. Need to state my COI here just in case anyone cares. I met Eddie at a conference in August we both were speakers at. He heard that I edit WP and am a photographer and asked if there were something I could do about his current WP image. (just take a look it will make you want to cry) so I took him outside and snapped a few quick images, brought the card in and let him pick his favorite, uploaded it and within minutes preformed what he thought was a miracle. ;-) Anyway, we talked a bit the next few days and I didn't think much more of his page until a month or so later when I realized how bad the page was, but with this really nice photograph. So I spend a few weeks playing with it. I went through every podcast and reference on this page, and stand by everything I wrote. I left a few things in that need the citation found, and the Dogma Free podcast I think will be up again in a few months, so left it there. I did let Eddie look at the page before re-releasing it, just so he could check it over for accuracy. He fixed some of my grammar but very little else. So here is the page, I would like to see if others want to improve it, but I think it is good shape for now. If you feel that I have been too nice, then please discuss here, or be bold and edit the page. I might very well have been too nice. I did try to find more criticism but there wasn't much that was noteworthy. I did include links to his debates which obviously do invite a opposite opinion. So enjoy reading and learning about this man.Sgerbic (talk) 06:33, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]