Talk:Peter Schwerdtfeger
| 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 is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion edit
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:52, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
Conflict of interest and sourcing issues edit
This article has maintenance templates on it because:
- It has been heavily edited by User:Paschwer, whose user name and behaviour suggest a potential conflict of interest, and has not responded to being asked about this; and by multiple anonymous IP editors who have made very similar edits
- Much of the content remains unsourced - currently, the entire Academic career section, which is also written in fairly standard resume like language.
Editors who disagree with the use of these templates should engage in discussion here as to how these issues can be addressed, rather than repeatedly removing the templates. Melcous (talk) 23:01, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
I have cleaned up part of the article. His academic career is not being challenged. I am sure the information is on the web site of his university. It does not appear to me to be any different than most articles on academics. I think the maintenance templates can be removed. Disclosure: I have meet Peter Schwerdtfeger at several scientific conferences and discussed his work with him, but I have no official links with him in any way. --Bduke (talk) 23:18, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
We cannot accept the Professor's request. edit
I totally agree that we can make an edit because the subject of the article has requested it. However, in this case, first, it is not clear that the subject has requested the full change, and second, even he had requested a change, the change in a good change and should be accepted. --Bduke (talk) 02:08, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
- @Bduke: It is perfectly fine to respond to edit requests by the article subject that are made on this page. However, I do not see any request at all on this page. FYI I opened a Conflict of Interest Noticeboard discussion as the subject continues to edit the page.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 03:27, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Outside Wikipedia I am retired academic who worked in the same broad subject area as Peter Schwerdtfeger. I therefore knew him having been at various academic conferences with him over many years. I have never collaborated with him. I have contacted him and had a long set of discussions with him. He now fully understands that he should not have edited his article and I am completely convinced that he will not edit it in the future. I therefore suggest that "A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject" be removed from the header. The other parts of the header should remain until the article has been rewritten. Perhaps I am now too close to the subject to do that, so could other editors improve the article. --Bduke (talk) 23:18, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
- @Budke: It's a really, really bad idea to contact article subjects in person. It compromises our neutrality for them to have any influence. that said, there is another editor who seems to be doing the bidding of the subject, so the tag stays until it is all stared out. Again, I would strenuously advise not to comtact the article subject. If they complain about your contact, for example, you can be blocked for harrassement. I'm sure you are well-intentioned but this kind of thing is an extremely bad idea. being in contact with the article subject about the article content means you also now have a strong conflict of interest and show not edit the article yourself.— Preceding unsigned comment added by ThatMontrealIP (talk • contribs)
- Nonsense. I have convinced him to not edit his own article. As I said, he is some one I have meet at conferences. He is certainly not going to complain about me contacting him. You did not sign your contribution. --Bduke (talk) 01:48, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
- Sorry but it is conflict of interest 101. We don't contact article subjects for their opinion as it does not matter what they think. I've mentioned this at WP:COIN, which is where any discussion should continue.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 01:55, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
- Nonsense. I have convinced him to not edit his own article. As I said, he is some one I have meet at conferences. He is certainly not going to complain about me contacting him. You did not sign your contribution. --Bduke (talk) 01:48, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
- @Budke: It's a really, really bad idea to contact article subjects in person. It compromises our neutrality for them to have any influence. that said, there is another editor who seems to be doing the bidding of the subject, so the tag stays until it is all stared out. Again, I would strenuously advise not to comtact the article subject. If they complain about your contact, for example, you can be blocked for harrassement. I'm sure you are well-intentioned but this kind of thing is an extremely bad idea. being in contact with the article subject about the article content means you also now have a strong conflict of interest and show not edit the article yourself.— Preceding unsigned comment added by ThatMontrealIP (talk • contribs)