This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons 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 sourcedmust 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 connected to one of the subjects of this article and need help, please see this page.
The DuPont section needs to be formatted for easier reading. There is an invention called "paragraph break" that might help. (But you'd better check whether is hasn't been patented by Monsanto 8-). All the best, --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 03:24, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
Point well taken. The summary of the "DuPont" era work expanded a bit beyond the few sentences originally envisioned. The paragraph break is likely a 3M innovation that immediately preceded "Post-its" but it's in the Public Domain now - hence it's probably allowed for DuPont work ;-) In any event, the description is chronological so the partitioning is easy. Thanks for the reminder. Pnictogen (talk) 17:29, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
This article is too long and only caters to a very niche audience. I suggest shortening/combining some sections and deleting completely unnecessary sections (i.e. Early Life). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 03:21, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
The article has a length and detail commensurate with other biographies in the American chemists, Inorganic Chemists, and Organic chemists categories. Wiki articles should provide the non-expert and expert reader alike with a summary and description that is sufficiently detailed and clearly written to be useful to both groups. Pnictogen (talk) 13:20, 31 March 2013 (UTC)