Talk:John Hadley (philosopher)

John Hadley (philosopher) has been listed as one of the Philosophy and religion good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: May 30, 2016. (Reviewed version).

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Science and Academia

	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
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Philosophy: Philosophers / Ethics / Analytic / Contemporary Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Philosophers
	Ethics
	Analytic philosophy
	Contemporary philosophy

Animal rights Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animal rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of animal rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Animal rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Animal rightsTemplate:WikiProject Animal rightsAnimal rights articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Australia Low‑importance

	Australia portal John Hadley (philosopher) is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

This article references a source that one of the article's contributors wrote or published. Citing oneself is allowed on Wikipedia, but may represent a conflict of interest. Contributors should be careful not to place undue weight on their own work, and are discouraged from excessive self-citation. Guidelines relevant to this situation include Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, Wikipedia:Neutral point of view and WP:SELFPUBLISHED.

J Milburn (talk · contribs) — {{{2}}}

A fact from John Hadley (philosopher) appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 6 June 2016 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the philosopher John Hadley argues that the territory of wild animals should be considered their property?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2016/June. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/John Hadley (philosopher).

Wikipedia

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:John Hadley (philosopher)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Sainsf (talk · contribs) 05:11, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It would be interesting to review this. Will get to this soon. Cheers, Sainsf (talk · contribs) 05:11, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fairly well-written, only a few comments:

In the lead,

"Currently" may seem hazy, why not say since when he has been on the post?

I'm afraid I don't have a source specifying when he started; some time between 2009 and 2012, but I couldn't be more specific. Short of access to someone's CV, piecing together exact dates can be tricky. Josh Milburn (talk) 16:09, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hadley has also conducted research...the ethics of aiding others. The first line seems to say the same thing. A bit repetitive?

Yes, point taken. I've rephrased this; I don't want the lead to give the impression that animal property rights theory is all Hadley has written about. Josh Milburn (talk) 16:09, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps we should make it clear in the lead how well his views have been received? Something like "mixed reactions"?

Good idea; I've added something. Josh Milburn (talk) 16:09, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In "Animal property rights", "animal rights" is a duplicate link.
- I'm sorry, I'm not sure I understand this. Josh Milburn (talk) 16:09, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  - It means "animal rights" is linked more than once, and we typically keep only one link in the article. Unless it is quite a while since the last link, and I don't feel this is the case here. By the way this is a great tool to detect duplinks. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 16:44, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    - Animal rights is now linked only once in the lead, once in the body and once in the navbox; is this what you were getting at? Josh Milburn (talk) 16:50, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
      - Right. Though it's optional to repeat the links from the lead in the rest of the article. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 17:03, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
In "Other research",

It could be clearer that "our" means the laypeople in ...are essentially no different to our duties...

Yes- I've changed to "humans'". Josh Milburn (talk) 16:09, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Pet" looks too common to be linked.

Sure. Josh Milburn (talk) 16:09, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No copyvio detected, no dablinks, the only image in the article is properly licensed. I would be glad to promote this once all the above have been resolved. Cheers, Sainsf (talk · contribs) 14:21, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for the speedy review- I was settling down for a long wait! I've replied to your comments individually. Josh Milburn (talk) 16:09, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I see no reason excellent articles like this one should have to wait so long, so I try to give as many as I can a shove ahead. :) Sainsf (talk · contribs) 16:44, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Great, good to go. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 17:03, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much! Josh Milburn (talk) 17:42, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on John Hadley (philosopher). 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/20160528085440/http://www.whp-journals.co.uk/EV/papers/Cooke.pdf to http://www.whp-journals.co.uk/EV/papers/Cooke.pdf

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: 18 January 2022).

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) 21:51, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
Templates Criteria Instructions