Talk:Ariel Fernandez: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 00:23, 2 January 2022

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ariel Fernandez article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5: 21 days

Biography: Science and Academia Start‑class

	Biography portal 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
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group.

Biophysics (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biophysics, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.BiophysicsWikipedia:WikiProject BiophysicsTemplate:WikiProject BiophysicsBiophysics articles

The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.

Arifer (talk · contribs) This user has contributed to the article. This user has declared a connection. This user has been banned and may therefore be reverted on sight. (COI determined at SPI here.)

This article was nominated for deletion on 2 December 2014. The result of the discussion was keep.

Neutrality in BLP

Per ORCID record, Fernandez authored over 400 papers. Scopus cites over 300 since 1993. BLPs require neutrality and this one focuses on 3 papers challenged by some reader(s). Probably a senior editor needs to fix the BLP.RutiWinkler (talk) 14:45, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK, senior editor here. Can you tell us what needs fixing as having had a look, there doesn't seem to be anything wrong! -Roxy the dog. wooF 16:04, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your attention. The article dwells excessively on negative content. I tried to fix it a bit today. Most of the references in the BLP refer to 3 or 4 papers challenged. Those papers have not been retracted, so nothing serious seems to be wrong with them. Most of the career section referred to that issue. I now added a brief paragraph to put things in perspective: Fernandez has authored and published over 400 papers. Having three or four papers challenged is almost a drop in the bucket. No need to dwell on the matter, especially since the papers have not been retracted after ten years or more. RutiWinkler (talk) 16:40, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently I am being accused of being a puppet of the subject of this BLP? [[1]]. Is this a way to deflect criticism? RutiWinkler (talk) 20:05, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If that's what he's mostly known for, based on WP:SECONDARY sources, then that's how our article must be, per multiple policies and guidelines. Concepts like "equal time" or "point/counterpoint" balance are forbidden. DMacks (talk) 20:36, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am looking further into this BLP. The BLP quotes five posts from a blog that deprecates Fernandez but a published quote by a Nobel laureate on one of his books got taken out. The page needs to be balanced. RutiWinkler (talk) 15:31, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Input needed

I have an idea. This page seems very conflictive and editing it is very complicated. A blog deprecating Fernandez is quoted five times and a Nobel laureate commenting on his book is left out. I suggest contacting AF directly, so we can get his input on the talk page and get consensus on what to include, leave out, change, etc. RutiWinkler (talk) 00:15, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@RutiWinkler: If we're trying to build an encyclopedia with neutral point of view, contacting the subject is one of the worst approaches possible, because they're going to push for the best possible light. —C.Fred (talk) 00:17, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I recall reading that the subject input is important to build a BLP, and we can always veto or reject anything promotional. As it stands, this BLP seems to berate the subject and I am being censored. RutiWinkler (talk) 00:23, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 00:17, 2 January 2022 edit C.Fred (talk \| contribs) Autopatrolled, Administrators 276,774 edits →Input needed: umm, no ← Previous edit		Revision as of 00:23, 2 January 2022 edit undo RutiWinkler (talk \| contribs) 44 edits No edit summary Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Next edit →
Line 32:		Line 32:

	:{{re\|RutiWinkler}} If we're trying to build an encyclopedia with neutral point of view, contacting the subject is one of the worst approaches possible, because they're going to push for the best possible light. —'''[[User:C.Fred\|C.Fred]]''' ([[User_talk:C.Fred\|talk]]) 00:17, 2 January 2022 (UTC)		:{{re\|RutiWinkler}} If we're trying to build an encyclopedia with neutral point of view, contacting the subject is one of the worst approaches possible, because they're going to push for the best possible light. —'''[[User:C.Fred\|C.Fred]]''' ([[User_talk:C.Fred\|talk]]) 00:17, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

			I recall reading that the subject input is important to build a BLP, and we can always veto or reject anything promotional. As it stands, this BLP seems to berate the subject and I am being censored. [[User:RutiWinkler\|RutiWinkler]] ([[User talk:RutiWinkler\|talk]]) 00:23, 2 January 2022 (UTC)