User talk:KnightLago
 | KnightLago is taking a short wikibreak and will be back on Wikipedia soon. |
| Welcome to my talk page. Please sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end. Start a new talk topic. |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 4 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 1 section is present. |
Protection on Kaveh Farrokh
Hi -- I'd like to know how you think this dispute can be resolved. I know about 'the wrong article' argument, but I think we have a problem here. The protected version calls the subject an "expert in the field of Iranian history and linguistics" on the strength of a story on the Voice of America website. The talk page puts forward two main points against this:
1. It isn't normal for a Wikipedia article to label someone an expert in the lead. Eg. Albert Einstein, Stephen Hawking, Samuel Eliot Morison, etc.
2. The subject may have written 2 books on Iranian history, but he has no qualifications in history - or linguistics. Only one (recent) review in the academic journals,[1] an M.A. in "Patterns of adjustment of international students to the University of British Columbia", and a PhD in "The relationships among cognitive processes, language experience and errors in Farsi speaking ESL adults." He works as a college counsellor. He's written on article on dyslexia, but none of this is linguistics.
Another problem is the second sentence -- "He has written and lectured on linguistics" - I can't find a reliable source for this and it either should have a fact tag or be removed. Even his web site doesn't make this claim. [2] (note it does say he is a learning psychologist, which I think is correct as his PhD was in the appropriate department ).
Those who want the edit to stay are content with the protected version and have no reason that I can think of to take any action to settle the dispute. Those who think that there are no reliable sources for the claims are faced with an article which isn't, in my opinion and that of others, up to Wikipedia standards. I'd like to know how you think the impasse can be broken. Doug Weller (talk) 19:00, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
- Hi, it looks like we have managed to come to a compromise on the talk page. I can make the agreed upon changes once the article is unprotected. Let's hope that the edit-warring will then no resume... --Crusio (talk) 16:21, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
- Forget it, someone just turned up and seems like we don't have a consensus after all. --Crusio (talk) 18:38, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 17, 2008 and before.
Because the Signpost hasn't been sent in a while, to save space, I've condensed all seven issues that were not sent into this archive. Only the three issues from November are below.
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 42 | 8 November 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 43 | 10 November 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 44 | 17 November 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 11:13, 23 November 2008 (UTC)