Danieljulie

July 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source, as you did to Michael Egnor, is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 15:00, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Please do not add content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did to Michael Egnor. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Auntie E (talk) 16:27, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Aunt Entropy,

The wikipedia editing policy states:

"Editors should provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is challenged or likely to be challenged, or the material may be removed."

I included no quotations, and most of the biographical details are included in sources already referenced (education, professional standing, research interests). Information such as birth year, parents' names, hometown, etc. are routine, are virtually never sourced, and not likely to be challenged. I ask that you itemize the challenges to the entries that you deleted, and your reasons for the challenges to Egnor's year of birth, parents' names, hometown, military service, education and professional training and experience. I have reviewed other pages of scientists and physicians, and this kind of information is not sourced. Egnor is a professional and representation about him should be accurate and as complete as possible. You need to explain your deletion of material that is ordinarily included in wikipedia biographies.

As for the references that I deleted, "controversial" in the first sentence violates neutrality policy. Coyne's statement that Egnor is not a scientist is factually incorrect (the article correctly points out his scientific publications). Furthermore, the statement that Egnor is a professor in the department of Pediatrics is not correct. Egnor is a professor in the department of neurosurgery.

Sourcing is necessary for quotes and for challenged or likely-to-be-challenged entries. Provide your rationale for each challenge to Egnor's routine biographical information.

Danieljulie: kindly read WP:BLP (which you cited to Aunt Entropy on her talkpage): "Material about living persons must be sourced very carefully." Further, you failed to read the policy you quoted above: "any material that is challenged". This material has been 'challenged' repeatedly by Aunt Entropy and myself. Per WP:BURDEN it therefore "must be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation". Neither policy imposes any 'burden' to provide a "rationale" for a challenge (or that it be 'itemized'). Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 05:54, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and I don't recall any of the cited sources discussing Egnor's religion or his army career (I could be wrong of course, but that's why we have inline citation, to make it clear where a claim is verifiable to). Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 06:09, 18 July 2009 (UTC)