Jump to content

Talk:He Jiankui: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
mNo edit summary
mNo edit summary
Line 41: Line 41:
* {{ping|Lvhis|Lvhis}} Thanks for the information. Note that Associated Press was one of major sources of this article, per that Wikipedia notability guidelines referenced here: [[Wikipedia:Notability_(events)#Diversity_of_sources|https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(events)#Diversity_of_sources]] "Significant national or international coverage is usually expected for an event to be notable. Wide-ranging reporting tends to show significance, but sources that simply mirror or tend to follow other sources, or are under common control with other sources, are usually discounted." "Media channels under common control or influence are usually counted as one local or national outlet and a single instance of coverage when they report a matter, even if they have several regional or national outlets. Similarly, where a single story or press release is simply re-reported (often word-for-word) by news publications, or when reporters base their information on repeating news coverage from elsewhere (for example, "AP reported that ..."), this should only be counted as a single source for the purpose of determining notability (see Wikipedia:Bombardment). Derivative reports and reports under common control cannot be used to verify each other, nor does mere repetition necessarily show the kind of effort that is good evidence of a significant matter."[[User:CRISPR Editor|CRISPR Editor]] ([[User talk:CRISPR Editor|talk]]) 21:55, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
* {{ping|Lvhis|Lvhis}} Thanks for the information. Note that Associated Press was one of major sources of this article, per that Wikipedia notability guidelines referenced here: [[Wikipedia:Notability_(events)#Diversity_of_sources|https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(events)#Diversity_of_sources]] "Significant national or international coverage is usually expected for an event to be notable. Wide-ranging reporting tends to show significance, but sources that simply mirror or tend to follow other sources, or are under common control with other sources, are usually discounted." "Media channels under common control or influence are usually counted as one local or national outlet and a single instance of coverage when they report a matter, even if they have several regional or national outlets. Similarly, where a single story or press release is simply re-reported (often word-for-word) by news publications, or when reporters base their information on repeating news coverage from elsewhere (for example, "AP reported that ..."), this should only be counted as a single source for the purpose of determining notability (see Wikipedia:Bombardment). Derivative reports and reports under common control cannot be used to verify each other, nor does mere repetition necessarily show the kind of effort that is good evidence of a significant matter."[[User:CRISPR Editor|CRISPR Editor]] ([[User talk:CRISPR Editor|talk]]) 21:55, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
* {{ping|Lvhis|Lvhis}} Also the author of the other major report from MIT Technology Review, Antonio Regalado, recently refers to his name as Jiankui He. He was the one who broke the story. See these twitter posts: https://twitter.com/antonioregalado/status/1071077216581242881 and https://twitter.com/antonioregalado/status/1070419770351202304[[User:CRISPR Editor|CRISPR Editor]] ([[User talk:CRISPR Editor|talk]]) 22:06, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
* {{ping|Lvhis|Lvhis}} Also the author of the other major report from MIT Technology Review, Antonio Regalado, recently refers to his name as Jiankui He. He was the one who broke the story. See these twitter posts: https://twitter.com/antonioregalado/status/1071077216581242881 and https://twitter.com/antonioregalado/status/1070419770351202304[[User:CRISPR Editor|CRISPR Editor]] ([[User talk:CRISPR Editor|talk]]) 22:06, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
* {{ping||NTK}}Thanks NTF for the info, please see two above bullet points, I agree with you and I know He Jiankui is correct order from the beginning but the issue as a scientific researcher myself we need to look up people's past work in the scientific literature and the order he has is Jiankui He. I am also a genome engineer so I have very suiting credentials to make this type of judgment as I am a scientific author. I have met the actual policy members such as George Church and Jennifer Doudna and other famous scientists that you mentioned. :) Also see this website, the actual event that occurred and his own public appearances for the event is Jiankui He as can be seen https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-07573-w. I just think the main thing if someone were to write a 214 page dissertation and 132 page book with their author name in Jiankui He it should stay in the order as intended by the person himself who authored it. The page was initially created Jiankui He and media reports had that but Wikipedia likely has influenced the press releases. By the way genome engineering is my bread and butter and I teach it also by the way in the U.S. :)
* {{ping||NTK}}Thanks NTF for the info, please see two above bullet points, I agree with you and I know He Jiankui is correct order from the beginning but the issue as a scientific researcher myself we need to look up people's past work in the scientific literature and the order he has is Jiankui He. I am also a genome engineer so I have very suiting credentials to make this type of judgment as I am a scientific author. I have met the actual policy members such as George Church and Jennifer Doudna and other famous scientists that you mentioned. :) Also see this website, the actual event that occurred and his own public appearances for the event is Jiankui He as can be seen at this link and the livestream recording at 1:15:00 https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-07573-w. I just think the main thing if someone were to write a 214 page dissertation and 132 page book with their author name in Jiankui He it should stay in the order as intended by the person himself who authored it. The page was initially created Jiankui He and media reports had that but Wikipedia likely has influenced the press releases and policy makers. By the way genome engineering is my bread and butter and I teach it also by the way in the U.S. :)

Revision as of 04:46, 8 December 2018

Merger

I am boldly merging Lulu and Nana here. The Lulu and Nana page is putatively about those two living people but was actually about the experiment that produced them and the reactions to it. I don't think we have enough information about the two girls to actually have a page about them. So I am just boldly doing this. If it is contested, we can have a formal merger discussion Jytdog (talk) 16:27, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Jytdog and Lvhis: FWIW - as OA of the earlier original "Lulu and Nana" article - yes - *entirely* agree - merging that article to here (ie, "He Jiankui") seems the better article focus at the moment, at least until there may be worthy verifications and details about the currently purported (afaik) "gene edited babies", I would think - in any case - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 20:49, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

great. Jytdog (talk) 22:33, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 7 December 2018

He Jiankui → Jiankui He – Corrected to original order the page was made in and according to his published scientific articles, lab website, and his social media pages CRISPR Editor (talk) 06:06, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:43, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Since you're no longer arguing in good faith I will no longer respond to you. The question is what name is he known by in English media now. Not what he used in a wedding announcement in Houston 8 years ago. Which incidentally, in Chinese says "贺建奎" not "建奎贺". NTK (talk) 17:27, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@NTK and NTK: This was a joke by the way as you can see by Haha and :). :DCRISPR Editor (talk) 17:57, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@NTK and NTK: Also it is not what he is known in English media. The English media is not the end all source of information, primary sources are and I am an English speaking U.S. citizen and born in the U.S. Please give me a source for this to back up your information.CRISPR Editor (talk) 17:58, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
When I said "English media," I didn't just mean news media, I meant any English-language media. The overarching Wikipedia policy on article titles is "consistent with usage in reliable English-language sources." Not official or preferred names. You are correct that He still uses "Jiankui He" in various English contexts. But "He Jiankui" is also correct, in fact more correct in his own language, is the normal Wikipedia convention for Chinese name article titles, and is now overwhelmingly "consistent with usage in reliable English-language sources." But the bottom line is He was unknown outside his field before November, not very notable even within his own field before this experiment, and in the current context he is overwhelmingly known as "He Jiankui". That's not just from press releases much less circular leakage from Wikipedia, that's from the scientific community and policy-makers talking about him and news and social media coverage in English. There's no issue with locating this page based on the other order either. We list both, and search engines will find this page with both. NTK (talk) 21:10, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:He_Jiankui&oldid=872625650"