Talk:Randal J. Kirk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Improving Page[edit]

Much of the content on this page was uncited. I am going to make substantial edits in an attempt to make it more factual and, where possible, to update sources. Looking forward to hearing thoughts. Chemistrybuff (talk) 16:12, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on Randal J. Kirk. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:55, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Proposing update to article[edit]

Hi there, I'm here to seek some improvements to this article to help with its readability and to reduce some WP:NPOV issues, particularly the puffery within the article. As disclosure, I do have a financial conflict of interest with this topic, as I am here as part of my work at Beutler Ink, consulting on behalf of Randal J. Kirk via Hill+Knowlton Strategies.

Overall, the structure of this article is not standard for biographies and there are details included that strike me as not being encyclopedic, and are potentially promotional. For example, the long quotes, full list of board positions, and details such as "Kirk is cited to be one of the most successful biotech company developers in the United States". As well, the year-to-year breakdown of Mr. Kirk's net worth and ranking seems unnecessary and better summarized as his current net worth within the infobox and Personal life section. Finally, given the little secondary coverage of his political contributions and the lack of controversy involved with this, the detail about this in the article seems undue and again, better summarized simply that he has donated to both Republicans and Democrats. I'd like to see these issues addressed and for the article to present a more thorough and readable overview of Mr. Kirk's life and career. To that end, I do have a full new draft that I've placed in my userspace for editors to take a look at. I'm happy to have anyone review the whole draft or to break this down into individual requests for specific sections or concerns.

The new draft is here: Randal J. Kirk proposed update and you can view a diff showing the changes vs. the current article's wording here: difference vs. current version

Let me know if you have any feedback or questions about the new draft and specific changes made. As I do have a COI, I do not intend to make any edits to the live article, and instead hope that an uninvolved editor (or editors) can review and make the changes they feel are appropriate. Thanks in advance! 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 22:17, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks 16912_Rhiannon! I'm working my way through the article and your proposed update. I've merged the infobox almost entirely as you suggested. I've also gone through the early life and career sections. Your proposed sections were generally far superior to the ones previously in the article. Most tweaks I made to your wording are minor. The exception being the final paragraph of your career section which I cut a bit more heavily. Your proposed version seemed to get a bit diverted from the topic of Kirk and digress into the genetically-engineered organism stuff. Also sometimes the sentences and given references would not make clear how the topic was connected to Kirk himself. I tried to connect it a bit more clearly (though admittedly the refs I found aren't the greatest). I hope you find the compromise wording agreeable. Happy to talk more about it either way. I'll keep working through the rest of this in the coming days. Thanks for being patient! Happy editing! Ajpolino (talk) 03:25, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
Thanks so much, Ajpolino. This is already starting to look better. Let me know if you have any questions as you continue editing. One thing I did notice: West Palm Beach, Florida, should go in the Residence parameter in the infobox, not Born. Could you also make that change? Thanks again! 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 15:02, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
Oops! Good eyes. My mistake... Ok I've finished merging in your suggestions. Same as above, your sections are generally far superior to those already in the article so for the most part I used your wording almost exactly as is. I organized the recognition stuff a bit differently since it seemed odd to organize just a tiny part of that section into subsections. I also kept a little bit of the old politics stuff, but severely pared it down. I removed a small bit of your wording where it seemed a bit advertise-y i.e. the wording of the intense praise from SynBioBeta and Forbes, as well as the self-made man stuff (We already know from the "Early life" section that he didn't feed off a silver spoon. No need to belabor the point). I hope that's all agreeable, but if not I'm more than happy to discuss specific concerns or other additions.
Thanks for making these suggestions/edits! The page is much better for it! Also thanks for being very patient with me and with the process here. If I can be of any more assistance, let me know and I'll be happy to help. Cheers! Ajpolino (talk) 03:22, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
Thank you again, Ajpolino! Everything is looking really great, I understand the changes you've made and I've checked with Mr. Kirk who is similarly understanding and very happy with the updated page. Appreciate all your help and the close review here. 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 15:28, 31 March 2017 (UTC)