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.

The result was Delete. There is nearly unanimous agreement, excluding SPAs and newbies, that this gentleman fails WP:BIO, and the current article sorely lacks WP:V. Xoloz 19:39, 15 August 2006 (UTC) reply

Bob Dobbs

ATTENTION! If you came here because somebody asked you to, or you read a message on a forum, please note that this is not a vote, but rather a discussion to establish a consensus amongst Wikipedia editors on whether an article is suitable for this encyclopedia. We have policies and guidelines to help us decide this, and deletion decisions are made on the merits of the arguments, not by counting heads (or socks). You can participate and give your opinion. Please sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Happy editing! Comments made by suspected single purpose accounts can be tagged using {{subst: spa|username}}.

Fixed template / bad nom for deletion. Listed by Modemac - nomination below: --Errant Tmorton166^{( Talk)}( Review me) 11:31, 7 August 2006 (UTC) reply

Delete for two reasons: Non-notable and violation of Wikipedia:Verifiability. First of all, the name of the person in question here is Bob Dean, not Bob Dobbs -- though I doubt he'll actually admit to it here. He's been hanging around the fringes of the Church of the SubGenius since the late 1980s, trying to pass himself off as the "real Bob Dobbs" (note he just calls himself "Bob Dobbs" and not the true "J.R. 'Bob' Dobbs"). Over the past 20 years or so, he did run a talk show on Canadian radio and he did produce a music CD called "Bob's Media Ecology" -- but this is hardly enough to warrant a Wikipedia entry. As for the rest of his claims, please note the following:

• The "Def Con" video included in the article shows a guy who may be 40 to 50 years old -- certainly not someone born in 1922 as the article claims.
• His real name (Bob Dean) is revealed in the news article listed in the links below (" Things get ugly in the world of underground art").
• After being tricked into contributing to his "Bob's Media Ecology" CD, Negativland then disowned the song: http://www.negativland.com/negdisco.html -- scroll down to the entry "Tribal Mandate."
• The Narduwar radio show link consists of him spending an hour talking about himself and his grand accomplishments. In addition to claiming to have "inspired" the Church of the SubGenius, on the same show he also claimed to have met Hitler, had inside knowledge of the JFK assassination, and predicted that a wonderful technological breakthrough involving magnetic energy and "healing" would be revealed to the world by 2001 or 2002. So much for verifiability.
• In an interview with "Gray Areas" magazine, Rev. Ivan Stang tells his side of the story: that Dean showed up in 1987 claiming to be "Bob Dobbs." ( http://www.grayarea.com/subgenius.htm - search for the word "Dean" in the article and you'll find it.) There is a plethora of evidence to show that the Church has used "Bob's" image and name since 1980. Dean has never shown any evidence proving that he "inspired" the Church of the SubGenius.
• And finally, the links listed include a video of Dean talking about himself, a radio show interview where he talks about himself, a Web site where he talks about himself, a couple of zine article about him, and a Web-based message board consisting of postings about himself. All this shows that this article on "Bob Dobbs" is nothing more than an ego page. -- Modemac 11:36, 7 August 2006 (UTC) reply

• Delete. In addition to all the evidence Modemac provides that Dean/Dobbs' claims to notability are false, I note that he claims to have been "active in key international intelligence agencies after World War II". Intelligence work is always a popular claim to fame among hoaxers; the question of sourcing is not disposed of by claiming that intelligence agencies wouldn't let any such information appear in verifiable sources, but that is cheerfully skipped over by the hoaxers. I also note that Dean's father was a member of the Priory of Sion. Too bad the Priory of Sion was a hoax created in 1956. -- Antaeus Feldspar 16:04, 7 August 2006 (UTC) reply
• Delete, subject does not meet WP:BIO once you remove the wild, unsubstantiated claims. In the interest of full disclosure, it should be noted that one of the only userboxes on my page is a Sub-Genius one.-- Isotope23 16:23, 7 August 2006 (UTC) reply
• Delete. I am Douglass St. Clair Smith, pen name Rev. Ivan Stang, main author of The Book of the SubGenius (1983), subsequent SubGenius books, the SubGenius RPG, the movie ARISE!, The Hour of Slack syndicated show and the earliest SubGenius materials from 1980 and even before. I would swear in a court of law or anywhere else that the character of J. R. "Bob" Dobbs is not in any way based on this fellow calling himself Bob Dobbs. His story that he met Dr. Philo Drummond and myself in the 1970s is simply not true. There is no evidence that the person I know as Bob Dean started calling himself Bob Dobbs before 1987 or so. In 1988 he and his wife visited me in Dallas, and he announced to me that, because of various supernatural powers which he claimed to have, he was therefore the embodiment of the "Bob" character and would henceforth play "Bob" Dobbs on his Toronto radio show. I considered him a kook and politely asked that he not go around saying he was "Bob" Dobbs. He did not take my advice. Evidently it angered him to learn that rather than being fellow believers, the Church of the SubGenius was actually composed of skeptics and mockers, because since then, in his every interaction with "SubGeniuses" he has behaved like an angry spurned fan. It is distressing to me to think that this person has used the popularity of our work to convince gullible unfortunates that he is the "Bob" referred to in our books. But, were this guy the real "Bob," wouldn't we who write the SubGenius books and produce the radio shows RESPECT him? In fact, he is has been a long-time laughing-stock to the SubGenius fans at large. To me he seems at best a depressing casualty and at worst a deliberate con man. -- revstang 13:23, 7 August 2006 (UTC) reply
• Do Not Delete because:
  • The man named Bob Dobbs, that is now featured on the new Bob_Dobbs page has a verifiable body of public and academic work bearing this name, including a regular radio show on CKLN radio in Toronto during the 1980s.
  • A section was added to this page describing the claim to the name. This page is called "Bob Dobbs". We include a link to J.R. "Bob" Dobbs to eliminate ambiguity.
  • The fact you seem to think that the Bob Dobbs in the video and interview merely talks about himself, is besides the point and not within the scope of whether this man should have claim to this page.
  • The School of McLuhan Studies at University of Toronto seems to vouch for Bob Dobbs' identity. See [3]. There are also several FCC and CRTC-licensed radio and TV stations that have aired this man as "Bob Dobbs". If you need any other points resolved, let me know and I'll dig them up, otherwise, don't waste my time with these false allegations of non-verifiability and non-notability.
  • Just because the Church of the Subgenius holds a position about this man's identity does not mean it should be rammed down the throats of non-followers. Again, you have your J.R. "Bob" Dobbs page where you can post your own definition of Bob. Stang has referred to his icon as J.R. "Bob" Dobbs predominantly over the years. He has no right to appropriate every variation of that name. Fair is fair. Octavian1 18:24, 7 August 2006 (UTC)— Possible single purpose account: Octavian1 ( talk • contribs) has made little or no other contributions outside this topic.. reply

• Comment Regardless, nothing in the article or that you've posted above meets the criteria of WP:BIO. That is the real issue here, please demonstrate how this person meets WP:BIO.-- Isotope23 19:06, 7 August 2006 (UTC) reply

• Delete, fails WP:BIO unless claims can be verified with reliable sources. -- Core des at talk. ^_^ 18:40, 7 August 2006 (UTC) reply
• Keep, I think this can be made into a more neutral article if given more time and effort. -- Monsquaz 18:49, 7 August 2006 (UTC) reply

Do Not Delete! The Bob Dobbs page represents a neutral point of view (POV) by offering information on both sides of this longstanding tiff between the Subgenii (followers of a cartoon Bob) and the followers of the real person named Bob Dobbs. It is not necessary to prove "who" came first. Why should Wiki get involved in this dispute? It's only necessary to keep both of these posts alive. Secondly, Time Magazine's Top 100 Phonies of the Century (in 2000), in which Bob Dobbs appeared as #1, was a list of real people, not cartoons. Nowhere on this list are they speaking of a cartoon drawing. This is where Wiki's rule of patent nonsense enters and the Subgenii are the guilty ones there. Wiki must stay neutral on this by its own rule. - Tina-Bob Tina-Bob ( talk · contribs) has exactly two edits, one to Talk:Bob Dobbs and one to this AfD.

• Comment In fact, here is the exact quote from TIME Magazine two weeks after the Jan 1 issue: "A few weeks ago, we published the results of our online poll in which folks submitted their two cents' worth on the movers and shakers, frauds and bloopers of the 20th Century in "Readers Speak: Down with Geraldo" (NOTEBOOK, Jan. 1). Under the category "Phoney or fraud of the 20th Century," we listed as first-place winner J.R. ("Bob") Dobbs, who earned 20.46% of the vote (Geraldo Rivera was second, and OJ Simpson third.) Just who is J.R. Dobbs?, some of you wanted to know. Unfortunately, an explanatory footnote failed to make it into print. Here's what it said: "J.R. is so phony that he doesn't exist." Dobbs is a very imaginary modern evangelical Protestant created online by an irreverent band that set up a website in his honor. You can find out about him at subgenius.com" ((End TIME quote.) This article in TIME was accompanied by our trademark picture of J. R. "Bob" Dobbs.-- RevStang 19:36, 7 August 2006 (UTC) reply

• Comment Doug, if it's J.R. Dobbs you're looking for, this is not the right article. This article was meant with all seriousness. I have been tracking and archiving Bob Dobbs material since I first heard Bob's Media Ecology in 1995. I thought that with all I have learned about him over the last 11 years, and the fact he is being asked to appear in the media more and more lately, it was time to create a Wikipedia page about him. To do this, I needed to create an account. I will be contributing more about other subjects in the future, but, for now, this is one I am most interested in. It was not an ego job as suggested above. There is actually a man with the name Bob Dobbs who is not the cartoon character you chose to represent your organization. Doug, do not abuse the deletion function of Wikipedia, unless you want to help degrade Wikipedia's integrity. Rather than deleting the page, let's work together to describe the whole situation rather than just choosing one side. I thought Monsquaz already did an excellent job of pointing out the differences. Is there just a particular fact you are disputing? Octavian1 20:07, 7 August 2006 (UTC) reply

The main dispute here is the fact that Bob Dean's "accomplishments" have been minor in scope, certainly not enough to warrant an entry in Wikipedia. This is what is referred to above regarding the article not meeting WP:BIO. -- Modemac 20:43, 7 August 2006 (UTC) reply

Modemac's use of the phrase "minor in scope" is highly subjective. Besides, is it a matter of scope or scale? Google test: There are many Google results for "Bob Dobbs" in relation to the man featured on this page. Verifiability (Some say): you will see verifiability in evidence on the pages linked to from the wiki page, as well as the Google results. I think this is turning into an issue of politics and ego from the Church of Subgenius group, rather than adhering to the principles of information integrity that Wikipedia stands for. Many of the statements in favour of deletion are examples of value judgements and subjectivity rather than scholarly objectivity. This is an act of Wiki page deletion abuse by the Subgenius straw men. Octavian1 21:07, 7 August 2006 (UTC) reply

There's little more that can be said, after pointing out that in in this edit, Monsquaz points out, "There is no substantial evidence for these claims." -- Modemac 23:53, 7 August 2006 (UTC) reply

Octavian1, read WP:AGF & WP:CIVIL. This AfD discussion is not the place for unsubstaniated accusations. The Google test is an "alternate test" for WP:BIO; i.e. not one that is generally accepted by the community. The basic problem here is that there is no evidence that Bob Dobbs meets any of the accepted, non-alternate, guidelines for an article about a living person, and there is nothing subjective about that.-- Isotope23 01:01, 8 August 2006 (UTC) reply

No-no-no! Do Not Delete

Time Magazine’s list of phonies and frauds (2000) was talking about the real Bob Dobbs because the other Bob Dobbs is the cartoon “religious leader” of the Church of the Subgenius. As you will see on their website, ( http://www.time.com/time/time100/phonies/index.html) Time excluded religious leaders from the countdown:

Over the past 100 years, in the midst of all the wonders of progress, there grew a thing called hype. Hype swirls and obfuscates, both hiding the truth and creating the lie. It can be as harmless as the latest pop star saturation, and as insidious as a two-faced government official. In recognition of this phenomenon, TIME.com has built a list, based on nominations from its web users, of individuals who are candidates for the title of the century's worst scammer, con artist, media manipulator, grifter, liar or charlatan. This list originally included a number of religious leaders. But we are convinced by protests from offended supporters that their inclusion, no matter how well justified in some cases by their behavior, might well stimulate an attitude of contempt for others' religious beliefs. - Tina-Bob

And then Time magazine made a further comment on J.R. "Bob" Dobbs himself in their February 7, 2000 issue: "A few weeks ago, we published the results of our online poll in which folks submitted their two cents' worth on the movers and shakers, frauds and bloopers of the 20th century in "Readers Speak: Down with Geraldo" [NOTEBOOK, Jan. 1]. Under the category "Phony or Fraud of the 20th Century," we listed as first-place winner J.R. ("Bob") Dobbs, who earned 20.46% of the vote (Geraldo Rivera was second, and O.J. Simpson third). Just who is J.R. Dobbs?, some of you wanted to know. Unfortunately, an explanatory footnote failed to make it into print. Here's what it said: "J.R. is so phony that he doesn't exist." Dobbs is a very imaginary modern evangelical Protestant created online by an irreverant band that set up a website in his honor. You can find out about him at subgenius.com." [4] -- Modemac 20:30, 7 August 2006 (UTC) reply

Delete For the reasons so eloquently put forth by Stang and Modemac. It is clear that Bob Dean is attempting to co-opt the identity of (the fictional) Bob Dobbs.

Retrieved from " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_deletion/Bob_Dobbs"

Do Not Delete: The Church of the Subgenius has no grounds to assert copyright infringement on a name. Bob Dobbs is a popular media ecologist, radio personality, author and philosopher who has absolutely nothing to do with the Church of the Subgenius in any way. Any similarity between them is name only. There can be many Bob Dobbses just as there are many John Smiths. Indeed, Wikipedia attempts to list many John Smiths: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_smith.

Perhaps if Wikipedia heard from more people named Bob Dobbs, this dispute could be settled amicably. But the problem now seems to be that there are ONLY two of them!

Since others have begun to repeat themselves, I will repeat Wikipedia has no grounds to get involved in a legal dispute between two characters who share the same name. Wikipedia must remain neutral, and this means having a page devoted to both Bob Dobbses. - Tina-Bob

Let me correct that. These characters don't even share the same name. One is J. R. "Bob" Dobbs and the other is Bob Dobbs. (Notice the initials preceding and the name in quotes. This comes directly from the Subgenius website.) Wikipedia cannot take sides in this dispute any more than it could take sides in a dispute brought by a John Smith who claimed R.J. "John" Smith stole his identity. Wikipedia must look at the accomplishments, alone and unfettered, of the one who goes by Bob Dobbs. Wikipedia can ask for the page to be edited, but there's no logical basis here for deletion of the page. - Tina-Bob

And let me correct this by noting that this deletion in process has nothing to do with copyright infringement. It has everything to do with WP:BIO and WP:V, which has not been improved or verified by anything said here. -- Modemac 23:53, 7 August 2006 (UTC) reply

Do Not Delete! Apparently most people understand this argument to be about identity theft so perhaps it's not as "eloquent" as it could be: (i.e. "Delete For the reasons so eloquently put forth by Stang and Modemac. It is clear that Bob Dean is attempting to co-opt the identity of (the fictional) Bob Dobbs.") I would think that if you wanted to distance your Dobbs from the embarrassing minor Bob Dobbs, you would welcome a Wikipedia page so as to minimize the confusion between them. But that's not what you want so your motives are highly suspect. - Tina-Bob

KEEP. As a member of the Church who knows Mr. Dean for the fraud he is, I do not wish his falsification of character and inspiritation to be hidden anywhere. His claim, and the valid disputation of it, should be publically documented. If the standards of WP:BIO and WP:V are important and often flaunted in the page, subscribe to it's changes list, and make sure they are correctly enforced. --temujin9

Comment Rev Exile chimes in... At issue here is Protocol and methods in which people make themselfs appear to the public... (see previous attempts) as well at hand is wiki's bio policy that only FAMOUS people get entries...

What I have and would like to raise a comment could this if allowed to must be used as a case forcing the current owner Stang out of the very Church he help setup because its influence is noted by Bob Dobbs and the Real "Bob". Or very much the confusion that he attempts to bring to the Church of the Subgenius... sure it might sell more membership packets if this gets into the news... but will I get arrested when I view my option to Kill "Bob", because this false prophet things he can step up and claim such... I value freedom of speech and all more so with the agrugement 'ck em if they cant take a joke. But damn serious? problem I have with the claims that he is the real "Bob" or not should be clear he never once uses quotes around his name as such "Bob". There many be many look alikes and false prophets... there is only one "Bob" That pipe smoking brother of Jesus. THE LIVING SLACK MASTER OF SALES, a guy so fake hes real... this "Bob" isnt That Bob, his follwers come to love, this is nothing more then to attempt to discredit a very respectable bizzaro weird sex ufo cult. NOt that we dont like a challenge. Heck reading up on this issue has really open my ears and eyes so much taht I must roll up my sleves and cast out false prophets

"It is not necessary to prove "who" came first. Why should Wiki get involved in this dispute? It's only necessary to keep both of these posts alive."

Well most would consider when a topic goes for deletion that its border line flamewar, which judging how quickly my previous comment was snipped shows how quickly things are edited. Its an old issue that seems to be revisited because someone felt up to putting it up... sie, thus we look at why wiki gets involved and snip this in the butt... this is a referance book of referance books yes? what myspace does for the social realm, wiki does for the scholar world. Failure to make a stand at this level could corrupt future chances.

"stations that have aired this man as "Bob Dobbs". If you need any other points resolved, let me know and I'll dig them up, otherwise, don't waste my time with these false allegations of non-verifiability and non-notability."

Except when thats the subgenius's guru old "Bob" Dobbs... Here we have a Bobbie (I dont use the term as a insult tho its meaning often implies such) attempting to create the "Bob" before his eyes... while you cant copyright names, you can shape the symbolism that its used from. Anyone can toss money around on two records and a book that is out of print to discredit the real "Bob". You can call yourself whatever you want but anyone claim such and use terms of the church to a means of your own end...

JESUS said, "Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves." (Matt. 7:15) ---- — Possible single purpose account: rev_exile ( talk • contribs) has made little or no other contributions outside this topic.

• Delete is at present time both my vote and my personal preference, the chief reason being that Wikipedia should avoid where possible adding to the leverage of a scammer. I have had (very limited) dealings with Stang, and someone who would pirate this gentleman's good yet undercompensated work deserves no free ride anywhere. Tina-Bob's certainty is QUITE a bit more suspect and specious than Stang's character could ever be in my estimation, especially since Tina-Bob's contributions are entirely limited to this discussion. Sock Puppet much? Similar observations can be made about two other keep voters (temujin, Octavian), which greatly adds to the weight for the case that this is a matter of vanity and self-promotion. For this reason, I suggest that the Wiki is best off without this Bob Dobbs, no matter the tests he might marginally 'pass.' If the article is kept, it is certain to be written by these SP's. Not a good situation for the Wiki. adendum These parties with no posting history are also the ones pitting the "human" pseudo-Bob against a "cartoon" Bob, a theme which none of the regular users here has taken up. This attempt to devalue the genuine labor and dedication Stang has given to his work (a "joke" religion that has spread the gospel of skepticism and critical thinking in spiritual matters for decades) does not wash. The symbol of the SubGenii may be a "cartoon," but the Church is driven by a flesh-and-blood engine. Few of us have had the task of shepherding the survival of an "against-the-grain" movement like Stang's, and we only need look at the casualty rates to know what a task it must be. None disagree that Stang has been injured by so-called "Dobbs." What desperate cause motivates the parties above to add insult? "The School of McLuhan Studies at University of Toronto seems to vouch for Bob Dobbs' identity?" I hope none were too lazy to examine the link; they permitted "Dobbs" to give a 15-minute talk eight years ago. I should hope that all of us have had greater days of glory than that. Bustter 09:28, 8 August 2006 (UTC) reply

• Merge and Redirect to J. R. "Bob" Dobbs, which is probably what most people typing "Bob Dobbs" into the search bar are looking for. Andrew Levine 09:45, 8 August 2006 (UTC) reply

• Delete Andrew: surely you are not suggesting that the patently false content of this page be merged to J. R. "Bob" Dobbs? I think you mean DELETE and Redirect. Eusebeus 10:50, 8 August 2006 (UTC) reply
  • This Bob Dean guy seems to have been kicking up a lot of dust claiming to be the inspiration for J.R. for quite some time now. Even notable impostors and frauds are worth mentioning (though I do not think he is notable enough to merit a separate article; a sentence or two in the proper article should be enough. Andrew Levine 12:56, 8 August 2006 (UTC) reply

Do Not Delete!

1. There is currently rampant confusion about the two Bob Dobbses. People generally believe they are the same identity.

2. There is an assumption being made here that when someone enters the name Bob Dobbs into a search engine they’re looking for information on the cartoon Dobbs church guy. This is an unprovable assertion. What many people may actually be looking for is clarification between the two personages or indeed they may have heard Bob on the radio. The Church of the Subgenius may even be taking advantage of this enormous misunderstanding. Perhaps the Church wants to continue the obfuscation of the two Bob Dobbses because the defunct Church is actually riding on the coattails of the real Bob, who is a more active radio/media person, and the old defunct cartoon Bob has seen better days (i.e. isn’t funny anymore).

3. Is Wikipedia about “famous people” or is it about “information”? If it’s about famous people, both Bob Dobbses should be excluded, because one’s not “famous” outside Toronto (do we have a definition of “famous”?) and the other is a cartoon illustration. But if Wikipedia is about information and if its task is to be the largest encyclopedia in the world, its mission should be clarification of the two Bob Dobbses so that people understand clearly that there are two of them.

4. Time Magazine excluded religious leaders from the Top Phonies of the Century countdown, but in their confusion about who Bob Dobbs is (yes, even they are confused!), they merged the identities of both the real and the cartoon. But in omitting religious leaders from the list, we are to understand that the cartoon Bob was shown the door.

As stated in #1, the Bob Dobbs confusion is pernicious and the goal of Wikipedia should be democratic clarification of the issue, not fascist obfuscation at the primary directive of the owner of one of the names! Oi-vei! 13:51, 8 August 2006 (UTC) Tina-Bob

• Comment. I don't know enough about this Dobbs to make an informed vote, however if this article is kept, then a DAB statement needs to be added linking to the J.R. "Bob" Dobbs article. If deleted, then redirect to same. If I were pressed to cast a vote, it would be to merge this with the JR Bob Dobbs article ... but only if verified, etc. 23skidoo 22:50, 8 August 2006 (UTC) reply

• DELETE, or Edit and Link. Delete the article - or keep the article, and make it available from the 'J.R. "Bob" Dobbs' page, with at least the following changes, which I have edited into the existing text based on my years of experience with and research in this topic:

Claim to name

Many people in the Church of the SubGenius are direct witnesses to the falsehood of his claim that he is the "real" Bob Dobbs. The 'controversy' stemmed from Dean's claim that he was the inspiration for the Church after its founders, Ivan Stang and friend Philo Drummond, first met him in Dallas in 1978, and his routine, unapproved use of the Church trademark and terms in his radio show on CKLN. Stang has denied this Dallas meeting ^[1], noting that he is a scam artist whose real name is Bob Dean.

Dean claimed in a 1998 phone interview ^[2] with Nardwuar the Human Serviette that there is no Bob Dean, and the name first came about when CKLN-FM journalist Bob Marshall, whom Dean associated with when working on his CKLN show with Myke Dyer, was seen in the company of Dean's wife Connie in Toronto, who supposedly took on the nom de plume of Dr. Carolyn Dean (after Garrett Deane, a personal friend of Bob and Connie from Nova Scotia). It was then assumed that Marshall was Connie/Carolyn's husband, and that "Marshall" was simply a pseudonym. Furthermore, Dean claimed that Stang's public denouncement is merely a behind-the-scenes cover for a "John the Baptist" type operation to provide ground for his work. Unfortunately for his cover story, which he designed in order to co-opt the "Connie Dobbs" character found throughout Church publications, Dean's 'Connie' - in addition to being his wife - was actually a registered M.D. in Toronto, registered under her actual name, Carolyn Dean. After being defrocked for various irregularities, she moved her practice to the US and has become involved in 'naturopathic' medicine - interestingly, on both her site and the 'Rebirth of Bob Dobbs' article referenced below, her 2005 radio show "Building Organic Bodies" was mentioned - once as hers and once as his, respectively.

In the meantime, in addition to his apparent regular fraudulent use of the Church of the SubGenius' trademark during his radio years, Bob Dean has occasionally pursued a low-level netstalking career centered around Ivan Stang and the Church, posting under the handle 'purple' on the Church Usenet group alt.slack, as seen here, perpetuating his virtual identity theft for effect. (Note: the original replacement of this wikipedia subject was another part of this ongoing effort, and its encouragement as such by Dean can be found at Dean's forum, here. He has also granted interviews under the fictitious name Bob Dobbs, and encourages the intended confusion with 'J. R. "Bob" Dobbs' by deliberately allowing those who write about him to portray him as associated with the Church - occasionally resulting in other fraudulent publications, as seen in the 'Rebirth of Bob Dobbs' article here. His 'SubGenius' act also temporarily fooled famed collage musicians Negativland into producing a spot for a Bob's Media Ecology record. Their statement disavowing this work as the result of "gross misrepresentation" can be found in their discography here (scroll down to 'Tribal Mandate').

He's posted to a newsgroup (alt.slack), he made a music CD, and he called a radio talk show eight years ago. Once again, none of this meets the requirements of WP:BIO. -- Modemac 09:37, 9 August 2006 (UTC) reply

regarding verifiablility

the McLuhan Program at the University of Toronto did indeed host this fellow 'for fifteen minutes' in 1998, as linked: http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/mcluhan-studies/v1_iss3/program.htm , billing him as 'Bob Dobbs'. I wasn't aware of this. Not mentioned is the fact that the McLuhan Program hosted him for a solo lecture on November 24, 2003, which ran for over three hours. I don't know exactly how to verify this fact, but it's on video and that mural would be hard to forge.

Donald Theall, in his recent book 'The Virtual McLuhan' (his second on the subject, with another on James Joyce), acknowledges first that the idea for the book 'arose out of a number of serendipitous meetings with Robert Dobbs'.

( http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0773531548/102-3331598-4620145?v=glance&n=283155)

In fall 2004 Toronto hosted the first 'McLuhan Festival of the Future', for which Bob Dobbs (billed as such) was given a solo event at the Drake Hotel (one of the official (that is, not in any way marginal) venues of the festival), which was advertised in the official program for the festival as a lecture on 'McLuhan and the future of ESP' (that is, not advertised as performance art by a satirist or marginal jokester, but "former McLuhan archivist and broadcaster Bob Dobbs"). Coverage of this event, including the name 'Bob Dobbs', appeared in Toronto's NOW magazine: ( http://www.nowtoronto.com/issues/2004-10-21/news_story5.php), Eye Weekly: ( http://www.eye.net/eye/issue/issue_10.14.04/op/wanderingeye.php), as well as in the Toronto Star, which article is transcribed at: ( http://www.flyingdogshow.com/bobdobbs/index.html), though I don't know about a link to the paper itself. The Walrus reviewed the festival; Mark Federman, Chief Strategist of the McLuhan Program wrote a response titled "too bad [the reviewer] completely missed the festival!" emphasizing Bob's event as a particularly "fabulous session": ( http://www.walrusmagazine.com/article.pl?sid=05/01/13/1659225)

His lengthy essay on McLuhan was also published recently in an anthology which I don't have the link for. Author: 'Bob Dobbs'.

Perhaps this is the result of a successfully spreading fraud, but I couldn't help but not notice a single reference to the Church of the SubGenius nor its mythology in any of those contexts. Bob's audience is wider than it is usually made to seem on alt.slack, his shpiel is distinctive, and he has introduced new concepts and frameworks to his field of McLuhan studies which many in that field find valuable and in the spirit of McLuhan himself.

I don't know if the above reputable verifiability of a name-recognition meets Wikipedia's standards for a notable person, however.

But it's weird that you linked to my post on the forum

any reason?

Ad Absurdum 05:53, 9 August 2006 (UTC) reply

Sure. See messages 7 and 8 in the thread.

Meanwhile, every single instance in which Dean uses the name Bob Dobbs is a specific reference to the Church of the SubGenius and its mythology. There is NO instance where he uses it before encountering the Church. Thus, each of the mentions you present are merely aditional instances of his fraudulent attempt to gain unearned reputation by referring to the Church. Pennames are fine, but I doubt that going around the vanity press presenting my spiel using the name "Astroboy" would be an acceptable reason for my fans to hijack Astroboy's wikipedia entry.

"the vanity press"??

I didn't even claim anything other than 'these links are verifiable'.

Pardon me for being annoyed that the SubGenii would rather believe he "isn't even a proper mcluhanatic, he's JUST a rip-off" who lectured to a "canadian holiday inn meeting room" (both quotes: Rev. Ivan Stang on alt.slack) than a sometimes highly respected McLuhanatic who lectured to the one and only McLuhan Program at U of T, and the one and only McLuhan Festival.

18:59, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

• Comment From what you say, it appears that he has been allowed to speak at those two venues once each, in years past. He has evidently not been invited back to either since. There are reports online from witnesses of his Feb. 2005 McLuhan Festival appearance that most of the audience walked out on his "seance" with the "ghosts" of Marshall McLuhan and Frank Zappa long before the show was over. You also neglect to mention that Dean's act was singled out, in the newspaper articles you cite, as an example of what makes the McLuhan Festival "kooky." The reason that his claim to be THE "Bob" Dobbs of SubGenius fame (or his claimed age of 84) is not mentioned in those articles is likely because professional journalists try to avoid reporting obvious untruths. If he is "highly respected," why does his name not crop up in more of the legitimate McLuhan forums and books? In fact he was banned from at least one such forum because of his abrasive manner and repeated unverified claims of personal connections to McLuhan, such as that he is in mystic contact with the shade of the deceased Canadian philosopher. He has a small reputation among some radio talk shows that he phones (i.e. at WCSB in Cleveland), but it is as a pest. I have recordings that serve as excellent examples of typical harrassment calls by him. When he is dismissed he calls back repeatedly, shrieking what he evidently considers to be powerful "code" phrases. Radio talk show hosts at New York stations, and guests on shows that he has called (such as Paul Krassner), have told me of very similar bouts of phone harrassment by Dean. The most recent one that Krassner quoted to me just last year involved Dean very specifically refering to himself as the "Bob" of the Church of the SubGenius and even adding that he was smoking a pipe like the one shown in the famous "Dobbshead" picture. -- RevStang 18:47, 9 August 2006 (UTC) reply

It's interesting to study the nature of Dean's two much-vaunted forays into 'academia':

Dean's quite fraudulent bio from the U of T appearance:

"Bob Dobbs was born in Paris and after World War Two worked with international intelligence agencies for many decades. He surfaced in 1987 on CKLN-FM in Toronto and began whistle-blowing. Two interpretations of Dobbs are circulating in the popular media: one is through the Church of the SubGenius that Dobbs inspired in 1978 in Dallas; the other is on two CDs, Bob's Media Ecology and Bob's Media Ecology Squared, put out in 1992 by Time Again Productions, early students of Marshall McLuhan. The best presentation of Dobbs' work is in his book, Phatic Communion with Bob Dobbs. Today, he travels the world explaining his/our victory over the Android Meme, and the tracings of these activities are regularly published in Flipside magazine."

A description of Dean's presentation at the McLuhan festival:

"I'm in an overseas phone seance at the Drake Hotel called McLuhan And The Future Of ESP, part of the McLuhan International Festival Of The Future. There've been films, art installations, tech businesses schmoozing for venture capital, and now someone's on the blower from England who speaks to the dead.

The medium, Glow, relates the doings of three ghosts, James (Joyce?), Frank (Zappa?) and Mac (McLuhan?), who communicate through sketch comedy. Apparently, they're on unicycles and have heads that pop open like beer steins.

On the Toronto end with a microphone is Bob Dobbs, former student and archivist of Marshall McLuhan. He can quote passages verbatim from the master's quixotic media theories like a carnival barker.

"The lids are on their heads?" asks Dobbs, seeking clarification from Glow. "And one of them is on the bike? Is it moving?"

"Yeah. The wheel is an ear; it's like a giant ear."

"A giant ear? Ho! That's tremendous."

This goes on past midnight. "

Quite the academic, this Bob Dean. Let's face it, the guy's a con artist, and the preplanned vandalism of this wikipedia topic by his few fans - undertaken specifically to aggravate the holders of the real SubGenius franchise, whose intellectual property he routinely appropriates as his own - is just another extension of his netstalking campaign against Ivan Stang and the Church. It should not stand.

KEEP This is Eli Elliott, the filmmaker who documented the Bob Dobbs in question during his 2005 Los Angeles Tour. I attended 4 different venues where Bob spoke, each event was near capacity except one which was around 50% attendance. Many individuals at the events where aware of Bob, knew him as 'Bob Dobbs', and also were well aware of his work in connection with Marshall Mcluhan and Media Ecology. Bob was also the main guest for a radio program with well known, award winning radio host, Martin Perlich. On the show he was referred to as both Robert and Bob Dobbs. One event I attended was a private Mcluhan study group consisting of individuals who for several years have met regularly for 3 hour sessions studying the work of Marshall Mcluhan; his teachings, writings, interviews, and also books from authors who wrote on Mcluhan. They all were familiar with Bobs reputation as a lecturer/teacher of Mcluhan studies, and identified him somewhere in the top 10 as most knowledgeable on the teachings of Marshall Mcluhan. And they all knew him as Bob Dobbs. Bob met with this group, spoke, and answered many questions. The group was pleased and very impressed with Bobs knowledge of Mcluhan and commented afterwards they had gained a better understanding of the subject matter. I had personally been to previous meetings with this group and gained more information and understanding on Marshall Mcluhan and media ecology from the Dobbs visit, than from the other visits combined. Through the internet, radio, documentary video, public speaking events, and private individual and group sessions, it is verifiable that this individual is known as Bob Dobbs. Through these same outlets it is verifiable that this individual is considered a leader in the field of media ecology/Marshall Mcluhan studies, and is considered as possessing strong knowledge of the subject matter in which he speaks. Eli Elliott 71.160.106.76 05:51, 10 August 2006 (UTC) reply

I'm having to repeat myself here every day, it seems: How does this blathering overrule the fact that the article does not meet WP:BIO and WP:V? -- Modemac 11:00, 10 August 2006 (UTC) reply

• Comment It is interesting that Eli Elliot is not able to provide a single specific identifying name, or URL link, for any of the alleged "events" in Dean's "2005 Los Angeles Tour" aside from the name of a radio interviewer (and neither Dean nor Dobbs are mentioned on Perlich's website list of interviewees). Dean's public appearances are referred to vaguely as having happened at various "venues," yet they all remain unnamed. The group to which he allegedly spoke is not named. -- RevStang 18:47, 10 August 2006 (UTC) reply
• Comment Its also interesting that all the events are captured on video. Quick search pulled up an archived listing of one event listed almost halfway down the page. And following this event listing, is an article/interview with Bob Dobbs from writer Rahne Pistor, who is the main culture/events writer for the Argonaut, a widely distributed print weekly catering to the west side of Los Angeles. http://www.jesgrew.org/wake/Events.html 71.160.106.76 00:44, 11 August 2006 (UTC)Eli Elliott reply

• Delete when you get right now to it, this is an article about a college radio DJ. Can you say Non-Notable? Stev0 15:42, 10 August 2006 (UTC) reply

KEEP Irrelevant of the former Mr. Dean's identity as "Bob" Dobbs, the controversy regarding his claims bears mention as an element of THE ETERNAL MYSTERY that is the Church of the Subgenius. Although I do think that a prominent disambiguation between Dean/Dobbs and Subgenius/Dobbs be included in any page regarding Mr. Dean's claims. A picture of Dean with a pipe in his mouth and a cheeseeatin' grin would be appropriate too, especially if it photocopies well.

• reply

"From what you say, it appears that he has been allowed to speak at those two venues once each, in years past."

From what I said, it should have appeared that he has been allowed (some might dare think 'invited' was a more appropriate term) two speeches at the McLuhan Program at U of T.

"He has evidently not been invited back to either since." -revstang

The McLuhan Festival has had only one other installment, and they hardly invited anyone related to McLuhan in the academic sense, more technology and design showcases and panels. And the McLuhan Program probably doesn't have a huge budget to fly people in, but that's just an educated guess. November 2003 and 2004 is not so many years past.

"You also neglect to mention that Dean's act was singled out, in the newspaper articles you cite, as an example of what makes the McLuhan Festival "kooky." "

I neglect? I'm on wikipedia. I figure they're more interested in who the organizers invited than what reviewers said, except as a record of the use of the name. In precisely that sense, the singled-out opinion I did not neglect was that of the UofT McLuhan Programs 'Chief Strategist' at the time, Mark Federman.

"In fact he was banned from at least one such forum because of his abrasive manner and repeated unverified claims of personal connections to McLuhan, such as that he is in mystic contact with the shade of the deceased Canadian philosopher."

In fact?? Perhaps, but you neglect to substantiate this claim, especially the second part of it.

If I just went to the links currently available, I'd find Federman saying the festival 'seance' was "fabulous" (that would be a 'proper mcluhanatic' who writes academic papers and that sort of thing staying to the end and not just a crowd of the curious (and, in many cases, drunk), cutting out early), and I'd find Bob's statements about this 'mystic contact' on alt.slack, which emphasized not believing them, but being willing to ask questions.

And don't respond to me as if "you neglect to substantiate this claim" says more than it says. This isn't alt.slack. Ad Absurdum 23:35, 10 August 2006 (UTC)Ad Absurdum reply

You neglect to substantiate this claim. I'll repeat yet again that the point of this article deletion isn't because a joker named Bob Dean likes to use the nickname "Bob Dobbs" in an attempt to get attention from SubGenii. It's because the article is still non-notable and his claims of things like being born in 1922, meeting Hitler, "inspiring" the Church of the SubGenius, and doing anything at all other than making a music CD and showing up at a McLuhan festival to talk on a panel discussion are not verified. So he showed up in Los Angeles - big deal. So he showed up in Toronto - big deal. This article is still a vanity page dedicated to nothing more than his ego. Delete. -- Modemac 11:17, 11 August 2006 (UTC) reply

COMMENT. Let's look at some numbers.

The average number of people who read a solo Dean announcement on his forum ( http://www.fivebodied.com/viewforum.php?f=4&sid=818b753951973b55cc3503651c09948f) is about 20. Usually it takes a couple of weeks for that many people to get around to reading a Dean post. Only about a dozen people actively post to the forum. If a post generates responses, the numbers go up as people repeatedly examine the thread to see if there's anything new, but obviously it is not a very large or active forum.

His "member list" ( http://www.fivebodied.com/memberlist.php?mode=joined&order=ASC&start=350) purports to show about 350 people -- but if you look at any given "member," the vast majority of them are spambot-delivered ads for Viagra, porn, etc.

Here, for instance, are his 5 most recent "members": http://www.fivebodied.com/profile.php?mode=viewprofile&u=382 http://www.fivebodied.com/profile.php?mode=viewprofile&u=381 http://www.fivebodied.com/profile.php?mode=viewprofile&u=380 http://www.fivebodied.com/profile.php?mode=viewprofile&u=379 http://www.fivebodied.com/profile.php?mode=viewprofile&u=378

A click on the "website" URLs of any of these so-called "members" gets you a sleazy ad or else a nonsense site that probably carries a virus or spyware.

On the legit SubGenius end, there are 3 different Yahoo e-lists (subgenius, X-Day, and Euro-SubGenius), plus alt.slack, alt.binaries.slack, and alt.binaries.multimedia.slack on Usenet. Alt.slack is classified as a "high volume" Usenet group ( http://groups.google.com/group/alt.slack/about). It carried 8697 posts during July 2006. There are generally about 50 people participating.

The main SubGenius website, subgenius.com gets an average of 19,000 visits a day. Not hits, but visits. A look at the SubSITE links page ( http://subgenius.com/contact.htm) reveals many dozens of spin-offs and fan sites.

The Church of the SubGenius has a mailing list of about 5,000 current active $30 dues-paying members. Over 30,000 have joined since we started in 1980, but we have lost contact with most of them over the 26 year period. We currently get an average of three new Members a day. By "member" I don't mean somebody signing up on a free Internet guest list, I mean people who sent us $30 for the ordainmant package.

The first SubGenius pamphlet was written in 1979 by myself and Philo Drummond, was published in January 1980, and is copyrighted that year with a copy deposited in the Library of Congress.

The first SubGenius radio show, Puzzling Evidence, started at KPFA in Berkeley in 1982 and is still on the air weekly.

THE BOOK OF THE SUBGENIUS was published by McGraw-Hill in 1983. It is still in print (now from Simon & Schuster) and has sold somewhere around 100,000 copies. REVELATION X is due to be reprinted in 2007 by Thunder's Mouth Press. ( http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0671770063/104-1363251-2055919?v=glance&n=283155) Thunder's Mouth is also releasing our new book THE SUBGENIUS PSYCHLOPAEDIA OF SLACK -- THE BOBLIOGRAPHON this October ( http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1560259396/104-1363251-2055919?redirect=true). The out-of-print "THREE FISTED TALES OF "BOB" anthology has stories by William Burroughs, R A Wilson, John Shirley, Lew Shiner, Mark Mothersbaugh and others.

Dean compiled and self-published a 130-page book (although half of it is comprised of quotes from other writers that he simply copied from other sources). It is called "Phatic Communion with Bob Dobbs" but it is copyrighted 1992 by "Robert Dean." It has not been in print for many years.

There is no evidence whatsoever of Dean calling himself "Bob Dobbs" before THE BOOK OF THE SUBGENIUS was published. His story of meeting Philo and me in 1978 is a lie or a delusion.

The SubGenius radio show called THE HOUR OF SLACK was first broadcast at KNON in Dallas in October, 1985. We are currently carried on 23 broadcast stations in the U.S. and Canada. ( http://subgenius.com/ts/hos.html) We haven't tried to count the number of Internet streams and "pirate radio" outlets. We are presently on episode #1,060. Guests on the show (in the station) have included Robert Anton Wilson, Negativland, Paul Krassner, Hal Robins.

Dean, on the other hand, has not had his own show in well over a decade since he was fired from CKLN. (And the "SubGenius jargon" he used on that show -- references to "Pinks," "The Xists," etc. -- all came from THE BOOK OF THE SUBGENIUS.) He was on a Toronto show as guest with conspiracy theorist Nelson Thall a few years ago, but that only lasted 17 episodes before Dean was removed from the show. The Toronto station CKLN, which originally broadcast his show in the 90s, is now playing old reruns of it once per month. The same station plays new HOURS OF SLACK every week. HOUR OF SLACK showcases many new bands, sound collagists, and "ranters." It is almost entirely original material, by many contributors.

Notables who have joined the Church include the late Ken Kesey, David Byrne, Paul Krassner, Timothy Leary, Paul Mavrides, Robert Crumb, Mark Mothersbaugh, Jonathan Demme, Gilbert Shelton. "Bob's" face was in the opening credits of PEE WEE'S PLAYHOUSE and was part of the set. The Dobbshead face was also used as part of David Letterman's set. David Byrne put a SubGenius-themed song in his movie True Stories ("Puzzling Evidence." The SubGenius membership is heavy with artists, writers, and musicians, as is obvious from the 9 anthology albums of SubGenius music, a perusal of SubSITE's "Art Mines," and our books.

By contrast, the only famous people that Dean lays claim to as friends are all dead. (That hasn't stopped him from "interviewing" them, however!) Dean drops Frank Zappa's name a lot, but in Zappa's autiobiography, he specifically mentions being a fan of the Texas-based Church of the SubGenius and describes "Bob" as "some guy with a pipe in his mouth." (page 234)

Rev. Stang has been interviewed by so many magazines and talk shows over the years that the list is many pages long. He appeared on CNN, BBC's "Things to Come," A Current Affair, the Jon Stewart Show, directed a SubGenius "art minute" for MTV, and has worked with DEVO on two of their music videos (doing animation).

Stang, under his real name Douglass Smith, has been a filmmaker of note ( http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0808028/) since the age of 16, when he won the Grand Prize in the Kodak Teenage Movie Awards. That winning animation ("The Wad and the Worm" went on to garner a Cannes silver cup and many other international film awards. The SubGenius feature film, ARISE!, was distributed by Polygram starting around 1988. It is still being shown in film festivals, the most recent being the Brussels International Festival Of Fantastic Film ( http://www.bifff.org/nl/archive/film1.php?id=1676). Stang also wrote and edited a series of documentary feature films for director Mickey grant, including the award-winning "The Cu Chi Tunnels," about the Vietnam war as seen by former Viet Cong.

As public speaker and performer, Stang and cohorts have led "devivals" since 1980 at such diverse venues as the Walker Art Center in Minneapolis, The Stone in San Francisco, Danceteria (NYC), The Institute of Contemporary Art in Boston, First Avenue (Minneapolis), Club Metro in Chicago, The Victoria Theater (San Francisco), University of Washington (Seattle), Alexandria Hotel, Los Angeles (sponsored by High Performance), Caravan of Dreams (Fort Worth), Massachussets College of Art (Boston), Bd Kuip in Amsterdam, SKAM (Hamburg, Germany), The Foundry (London). Stang has been a featured speaker at the Winterstar and Starwood Festivals (largest neopagan festival in the U.S.) every year since 1990, and since 1996 he has produced the annual "X-Day" SubGenius festivals at Brushwood Folklore Center in New York. This outdoor camping and music festival attracts from 150 to 300 SubGenius fans and has been the subject of two documentaries (one by Stang and another, "Countdown to X-Day," by Richard Darrigo). There is also an annual "teX-Day" in Texas and annual European X-Day Drills, usually held in Amsterdam. (In 2006 it was in Pisa, Italy.)

Noted filmmakers The Bolex Brothers made a film of Stang's Brag of the SubGenius, called "Day of the SubGenius." (See http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4585014238229810366&q=SubGenius for that film and many of the others mentioned here.)

There have been four World SubGenius Conventions since 1980, in Dallas, Chicago, Baltimore and San Francisco. People came from as far away as Bolivia and London to attend these bizarre events.

For a list of SubGenius events since the middle 1990s, with text reports and many photos, see http://subgenius.com/bigfist/fun/devivals/devivals.html

 Delete. --
RevStang 
21:17, 11 August 2006 (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.