Talk:Stephanie Seneff

Notability

I'm concerned that this person doesn't really pass WP:NOTE requirements for notability. In fact it seems a clear candidate for WP:BLP1E but before starting an AFD I thought I'd see what others think. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 20:07, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

• This seems to be a very notable computer science researcher, with many highly cited papers in that area (see Google Scholar). Her glyphosate research is outside of her area of training, but apparently that is what makes her known to the general public. I think the article should be expanded with some stuff about her real scientific contributions, which should be the meat of the article, as opposed to the stuff that is controversial, but a much smaller part of her career. --Randykitty (talk) 14:40, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

I don't even think this wiki page would exist if she had never spoken publicly against the big firms who's products demonstrated possibly serious large scale harmful effects without giving the wiki entry more of a full spectrum detail and less bias content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.88.222.106 (talk) 00:41, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Controversy

Continuing on with Seneff's controversial ideas she has now followed Kerri Rivera (of chlorine dioxide and autism fame). Honestly there seem to be no places where Stephanie doesn't step on someone else's field. There is some (limited) discussion on Twitter about having her fired from MIT. Here's an example of Seneff talking to Riverra https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ybiHGCA71G8 Smidoid (talk) 19:39, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

Continued coverage

It looks like Seneff is getting continued coverage of publications in line with WP:FRINGE. The most recent one covered here tries to claim GMOs, glyphosate, etc. are responsible for concussions. Not sure if it's worth expanding on in the article at this point, but it does appear her main reputation now is trying to correlate a bunch of things to vaccines, GMOs, etc. and overall being criticized for it. Kingofaces43 (talk) 16:40, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Sourcing and weight

I don't want to become involved in editing this article, so I'm leaving this as an admin comment only, related to the BLP issues.

An issue arose during the AfD about the self-published sources that were in the article in violation of WP:BLPSPS. So far as I can see, they have been removed, except for Snopes, which I believe is also an SPS. Even if it isn't, it's not an RS for a BLP or autism.

There are other issues. The paragraph about Seneff's views on autism is very problematic, as is the paragraph about cholesterol. She isn't an expert in these areas, and the Pacific Standard isn't an RS on autism. We ought not to use SPS and non-RS to counter material that shouldn't be there in the first place. Re: "Seneff and her MIT colleagues have also done research on the relationship between fat and cholesterol consumption and health in America" – if it's published, let's see it; if not, let's not mention it.

Because of the minimal sourcing, the whole section should probably be reduced to something like "Seneff has become a controversial figure within the scientific community as a result of her views on autism, cancer, gluten sensitivity and glyphosate, as well as her views on cholesterol consumption." The rest of her biography should be developed so that those aspects aren't the main thing.

Because this kind of issue keeps cropping up, editors active in this area should consider drafting something for BLP about not creating bios on borderline figures notable only for highly contentious views about scientific matters outside their area of expertise, where the sourcing is so minimal. Or at least drafting advice about how to write them. SarahSV ^(talk) 02:45, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Stephanie Seneff. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160606170517/https://scholarlyoa.com/2015/01/08/anti-roundup-glyphosate-researchers-use-easy-oa-journals-to-spread-their-views/ to https://scholarlyoa.com/2015/01/08/anti-roundup-glyphosate-researchers-use-easy-oa-journals-to-spread-their-views/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:17, 7 November 2017 (UTC)