Jump to content

Talk:Tim Hunt

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Nonsenseferret (talk | contribs) at 20:20, 4 April 2018 (→‎Controversy: r). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Order change

I changed the order of the paragraphs to a more logic one - career first, then personal things, at the end the bibliography. The article remains very unbalanced, with major importance given to one incident, which overshadows this Nobel Prize winner's scientific achievements. When will someone have enough courage to axe most of this non-information, to make Wikipedia look less ridiculous? Hartenhof (talk) 20:38, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ordering it like this is sensible. You aren't the first person to suggest cutting that section down. However, that is easier said than done. It is a controversial subject and people will critisise a cut down version for missing an important point. I think we may have to choose between a very short, very bland, statement and the level of detail currently present. Yaris678 (talk) 13:54, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It may be preferable to transfer these paragraphs to a new article about the controversy, leaving only a small reference in the original article. Hartenhof (talk) 21:38, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I suggested the same thing in 2015. This can be seen at Talk:Tim Hunt/Archive 1#Shortened replacement proposal. At the time, one editor disagreed with the idea and another said only time will tell if it would be appropriate. Well, we've had nearly two years now... so maybe we can judge that it is appropriate. Yaris678 (talk) 07:52, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I see that I was the one who started the Shortened replacement proposal in 2015. I remember it now... Well, it's 2017 and the dust should be settled... Hartenhof (talk) 18:38, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The whole section is still on Wikipedia, but today I isolated it from the main story by transferring it to this new article. Hartenhof (talk) 19:36, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nice one. Yaris678 (talk) 17:52, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I can see, those consequences from the controversy that do belong into this article, namely the resignations etc. that are an integral part of his career, are now missing from the article. Those are part of his direct biography and should be restored. Markus Pössel (talk) 14:27, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to restore them, please keep them as short as possible, and don't add resignations from the jobs and honours that never before were mentioned in the main article. Hartenhof (talk) 14:37, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Tim Hunt. 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:

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) 01:55, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Controversy

This Tim Hunt page has 5189 words. The pure text (apart from infobox and categories and-so-on) contains 4335 words, of which 2443 (56%) are still confined to one silly remark thay the man once made, almost three years ago. I think this is a devaluation of what Wikipedia should be : an encyclopedia, rather than a website reporting small incidents, human interest or gossip. I tried to do something about it, by moving this entire section to its "own" article (leaving links and a small summary in the original article), but after a year or two it was "speedily" deleted by someone who called himself El cid, el campeador. Obviously this knight was not a very good reader, because he labelled this article as a copyright violation, believe it or not. So... the result is, that the 2443 words about Sir Tim's silly mistake are back in the original article, and will presumable keep dominating the text forever, whatever this once respected Nobel Prize winner may have done, of will do, in his now miserable life... Is there anyone who has the guts to cut the section down to, say, 100 words? Hartenhof (talk) 18:01, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This whole thing sounds an awful lot like a POV. Please take a look at WP:NPOV. Thanks : ) ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia ᐐT₳LKᐬ 18:22, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This is not an article my friend, but a Talk page. Hartenhof (talk) 18:59, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I agree this section is ridiculously out of proportion. --ℕ ℱ 20:20, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Tim_Hunt&oldid=834269671"