Talk:John Vidale

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
	This article is supported by the Science and academia work group.

[edit] Notability

This page was marked for my lack of notability on 4-10, so I put in more detail (4-11-07), with a criteria I noticed somewhere of 2 mentions in the popular press as the target. Now potential lack of an objective point of view is invoked, which I don't really see from the prose.

Some less productive scientists than me are listed, but many more productive ones are not (I'm tempted to start adding some of the most accomplished seismologists to make my entry less of an eyesore). I'm not offended whatever the moderators decide, if they even notice the existence of such a picayune entry.

I've copied the file to my user article, so deletion of the article would not lose the formatted info. (John 13:35, 12 April 2007 (UTC))

I see the notability comment has reappeared, so this is where I saw the standard I thought applied:

Keep per Dhartung: Subject of two independent media articles = Passes WP:BIO with flying colors. -- Antepenultimate 23:52, 9 December 2006 (UTC) at this link - [[1]].

The reference standard is A person is notable if he or she has been the subject of secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject. from [[2]]

I'd argue the combination of newspapers in NY, India, Moscow, plus some specialist and mainstream magazines passes the notability criteria, but again, I wouldn't object to deletion for lack of NPOV. (John 18:41, 14 April 2007 (UTC))

[edit] NPOV

Can you re-write this in a NPOV, from the 3rd person? Otherwise, I'll do it. Bearian 17:34, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Be my guest, I don't see where it lacks an NPOV. (John 17:57, 17 April 2007 (UTC))

Try to keep to a single voice -- i.e., all active voice. Bearian 19:26, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Editing can make things flow better. Hopefully, that helped. Bearian 19:32, 29 April 2007 (UTC)