Talk:David Woods (safety researcher)
 | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. |
Contested deletion edit
This page is not unambiguously promotional, because the information about the specific contributions should be of encyclopedic interest. I bootstrapped the content on this page from a published work (Cognitive Systems Engineering: The Future for a Changing World) that had biographical data on the subject, but I can see that this has made this more hagiographic rather than neutral.
I'd like the opportunity to flesh out the contributions in more detail, I believe that content is of encyclopedic interest. In one of my github repos, you can see some notes I've taken that I'd like to add to Wikipedia because I think these are genuinely of interest to the community.
I'd be happy to remove the biography/awards content as well, but I'm hoping that this doesn't just get deleted.
Lorinmh (talk) 16:54, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
- @Lorinmh: I've declined the deletion request but the article needs pruning and work on tone. The subject's citation profile looks to me to potentially meet WP:PROF but reliable independent sources are needed for all claims of significance -- you can't just use the subject's own publications. Espresso Addict (talk) 22:24, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
- I've added a "National advisory committees and testimony" section, which contains only reliable independent citations, but I fear it makes the article feel even more like an advertisement. I'm having some trouble balancing the "establish notability" requirement from the "don't read like an advertisement" requirement. Lorinmh (talk) 00:32, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
- @Lorinmh:It's always a delicate balance, and even those of us who've been here for >15 years struggle with it. I know nothing of this field in particular but I'd be extremely surprised if this were to be deleted after a discussion at WP:Articles for Deletion, as academic biographies are judged there against WP:PROF, and I believe the citation profile would meet criterion 1. So you can consider notability to be established here, imo. I've posted some more general advice on your talk page to avoid clogging up this page. Espresso Addict (talk) 01:18, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
- I've added a "National advisory committees and testimony" section, which contains only reliable independent citations, but I fear it makes the article feel even more like an advertisement. I'm having some trouble balancing the "establish notability" requirement from the "don't read like an advertisement" requirement. Lorinmh (talk) 00:32, 18 September 2022 (UTC)