Talk:Irwin Fridovich

Comment

This article was flagged for a copyright problem. Unfortunately, the individual who flagged it did not look closely to see that JBC (the link referenced) releases all of their back issues - of which the reference is one - to the public domain and therefore the link is appropriate and there is no infringement. If the citation was misplaced, a simple correction by the person who flagged it, or a question about it would suffice; not a blanking of the page! If it is the use of the CV to fill out more information, I have the email and CV on-hand and would appreciate some advice on how to appropriately provide it, since I have direct permission for the document. In short, pull down the copyright flag and help me resolve this. Jeremyblock (talk) 21:12, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

This article was copied from a journal. I can't read "public domain" anywhere on their website, but Copyright © 2011 by American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology. Free access to content does not mean it is in the public domain. --Polarlys (talk) 12:12, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

I think your assertion that it was 'copied' is inaccurate and I'd like you to directly outline which parts are 'copied' without proper attribution. Else, take the flag off because proper attribution is not copying. Additionally, the notion that because the website says it was copyright 2011 is insufficient since that is on each webpage referencing the SITE ITSELF being copyright, not the article (but again, the article is attributed, which is not the same as copying). You've insufficiently justified your blanking of the page and I think that another administrator should look at this besides you since you're failing to adequately explain your decision or justify it. Jeremyblock (talk) 03:21, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

I see JBC is a journal of ASBMB and I can't find anything on either site indicating public domain on any of their past publications. Without proof of this, the text will have to be removed. Attributing another's copyrighted work applies to brief quotes, not large amounts of text which is seen in this article. If the text is public domain, attribution is accomplished by this template. Additionally, there is sometimes confusion between public/press release and public domain on Wikipedia. A comparison of the source and the article can be seen here. This article is currently listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2011 June 22.--NortyNort (Holla) 13:10, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

It appears that ASBMB only allow non-commercial re-use without permission [1], which isn't sufficient for Wikipedia purposes as our content is licensed for commercial re-use. January (talk) 18:18, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Let's start over again

This article certainly had nothing contentious or libelous in either the old or the new form. However, both are in dire need of appropriate referencing, and the new one needs the more interesting facts re-introduced. Fridovich is indeed notable by virtue of significant scientific achievements, awards, and secondary sources, so I would like to see this page revitalized. I will try to start adding material and citations, and would much appreciate not having anyone delete it in the meantime. Dcrjsr (talk) 06:24, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Resume Style Needs to Be Fixed

An interesting and notable scientist, but 2 sections in the article are written like a WP:RESUME rather than in encyclopedic style. I took a pass at the academic career section[2] but the awards section still needs the same treatment, as well as pruning; the list need not be exhaustive but rather limited to the most important awards and prefaced with something along the lines of "Fridovich has received numerous awards for his scientific and academic achievements, including...". Also, the article needs more WP:SECONDARY sources. Cheers. Rhode Island Red (talk) 22:53, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your interest, and the work on the career section. As a start on what should be a more thoro rewrite, I've redone the Awards section in paragraph style, and added 3 secondary sources. Dcrjsr (talk) 01:42, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

My pleasure. I like your additions. Good job. Have you looked at the Kresge article? A very good review as I recall. You might want to mine that for some more details. Rhode Island Red (talk) 04:02, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it's excellent and very helpful. That crew do a really dedicated job on the JBC classics. Dcrjsr (talk) 12:50, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Indeed. Have at it and let me know if I can be of any assistance. Page is on my watchlist. Rhode Island Red (talk) 14:50, 28 September 2012 (UTC)