This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women 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.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of engineering 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.EngineeringWikipedia:WikiProject EngineeringTemplate:WikiProject EngineeringEngineering articles
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
Our Leverhulme Prize article (where that source is used for 2001) is not consistent with that source. Compare the names of the categories in the Leverhulme Prize article with the categories found in that source. (Also, sources from near 2001 report that there were typically ~25 prizes a year, and this source lists far more names than that.) Something is inconsistent here, but my strong impression is that it's the wrong source, and that it describes some grant program that is not the actual Leverhulme Prize. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:03, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply
For another example, the similar-looking source given in Philip Leverhulme Prize for 2003 does not include the actual winners of the 2003 prize, who are named in https://web.archive.org/web/20040712172508/http://www.leverhulme.ac.uk/news#prizes2003 — adding to my impression that the sourcing used for the early history of the prize in our article on the prize is completely bogus. Unfortunately the 2003 prizes were as far back as I found on archive.org. I found an incomplete listing of about half the 2001 winners at doi:10.1063/1.1445561, none of whom are included in the archive link you give. Shea's own early work such as doi:10.1017/S1359135503001738, a 2002 publication, includes the acknowledgement text "Current research support is provided by a Philip Leverhulme Prize through The Leverhulme Trust". —David Eppstein (talk) 20:12, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply
