Talk:Christopher Weaver

Untitled
The article is about the founder and creator of one of the most popular game software developers. Bethesda Softworks, under his supervision, spearheaded the development of first physics-based sports simulators, leading to the creation of the original John Madden NFL game.


 * The article appears to fail WP:BIO.  ttonyb  (talk) 06:36, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't think it does, but if so it is an AfD matter not a speedy. DES (talk) 08:16, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Christopher Weaver. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120718093221/http://cms.mit.edu/people/postdocs.php to http://cms.mit.edu/people/postdocs.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:49, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Unsourced part of "Current"
"Weaver has served on committees for national and international organizations. Some of his past and present appointments include: American Association for the Advancement of Science, National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, National Research Council, International Game Developers Association, Cable Telecommunications Research Institute, Society of Cable Television Engineers, Aspen Institute, and Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. Recently, he was asked to co-direct a new Center at MIT, which will use the science and epistemology of games to enhance STEM education for children of multiple age groups. [citation needed] .. Congressional Committee of House Administration .. ,
 * No sources. Summarize in a sentence?

"and to the science fiction film, Geostorm, slated for release in 2016." "In 2005, Weaver was inducted into the Cosmos Club for excellence in Engineering.[1]"
 * Not significant. Only an insider would know about "Geostorm" advising, if true; someone who knew Devlin or Weaver.

Guardlifer (talk) 22:17, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
 * These and several other articles have been edited by Weaver himself, so there's a lot of COI fluff added. If you can't find a source for any of the above, just remove it. It can always be added back if sources are located. -- ferret (talk) 22:26, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Okay, removed for now. Guardlifer (talk) 23:59, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Removed Madden claim. Bethesda exaggerated its role while suing EA, no way to tell if "its" physics engine was in the result. But Bethesda came in in the middle, sued, and left before completion; the development work was never finished. (anyway, more appropriate for the Bethesda Softworks article.) The IGN history seems to cover both sides. Guardlifer (talk) 23:43, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Problem with Primary Sources
Hello. I have a personal connection to Christopher Weaver, and would like to propose an independent review of the proposal below to amend a section of the article.

In the Career section, the fifth paragraph should be changed. Currently, multiple sources in paragraph violate WP: PRIMARY since they = interpretation of original court documents. Here are the problem statements and sources that should be removed.

...and served as CTO until 2002, then was pushed out. He filed a lawsuit against ZeniMax, claiming he was ousted by his new business partners and was owed severance when ZeniMax didn't renew his employment contract. They filed counterclaims saying he had gone through emails of other employees to make his case.

Proposed replacement language and sources:

In 1999, Weaver co-founded ZeniMax Media with Robert A. Altman, as a new parent company for Bethesda. Weaver contributed his stake in Bethesda to ZeniMax. Weaver filed a lawsuit after being pushed out from the company. The case was resolved out of court. Although still the largest shareholder as of 2007, Weaver no longer had any day-to-day responsibilities with ZeniMax. ”

Thank you. Ringside44 (talk) 14:17, 15 July 2022 (UTC) Ringside44 (talk) 14:17, 15 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Quick comment, but Primary sources are ok for basic statements of fact. I'm not endorsing the current version at this time, just noting that "It's primary sources" is not necessarily grounds to remove information. -- ferret (talk) 14:39, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Actually, can put the entire primary source issue to bed. The court cases and the access to other employee's emails is in this source: . While likely there is circular reporting here, it's a bit irrelevant as the court documents also make it clear this happened. -- ferret (talk) 18:44, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Well, WP:BLPPRIMARY is pretty clear about court documents. There's also this article from The Washington Post.  Unrelated, but it would be nice if this article clarified what technical role(s) Weaver had at Bethesda and left it at that.  No offense to Weaver, but one thing that becomes obvious if you read enough interviews is that quite a few of the early Bethesda people consider themselves to be the creator of The Elder Scrolls (and are treated that way by reliable sources). NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:37, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Part of the issue is that Weaver himself wrote a fair amount of this article and it's never quite gotten a clean up. -- ferret (talk) 13:27, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

The lower court decision finding Weaver improperly accessed emails was overturned in its entirety, with the higher court determining that the lower court’s findings were an open question of fact that should be determined in a trial, not by summary judgment. Weaver vehemently denied that it was improper for him to access company emails while he was the Chief Technology Officer of the company and its largest stakeholder. | Weaver v. Zenimax Appeal

Given the personally damaging nature of the accusations about improper access to emails and the higher court throwing out the lower court’s findings to this effect, even if the case and the settlement are included in the Zenimax article, I think there should not be any mention of the unproven and disputed allegations against Weaver. While Weaver was never charged with a crime (which is strong evidence that there, of course, was none) Zenimax allegations are tantamount to an allegation of criminal conduct. Thus, I think BLPCRIME is relevant.

Otherwise, these allegations need to be disputed with this use of a primary source, which is a highly complex appellate legal decision, not easily summarized | Weaver v. Zenimax Appeal.

I’d note that no one has yet removed the indisputably improper use of court documents to make allegations against a person which I pointed out above.WP:BLPPRIMARY. 38.140.161.59 (talk) 16:27, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

❌ @Ringside44 Ringside44 New editor here trying to clean up the request edit backlog. I reviewed the request and the notes above. It appears to me that the current language is supported by the Escapist magazine citation (not court documents). Duke Gilmore (talk) 03:04, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
 * The Escapist article is from February 2007. The appellate ruling issued in May 2007. Therefore, the Escapist article is not accurate (or rather, it was accurate at the time of publication, but the dismissal of the case was later reversed).  Therefore, this does, in fact, need to be amended.


 * However, the request of the original poster is not quite right either. The Appeals Court hinged it’s decision on whether dismissal was appropriate on the discoverability of the materials and the unfair advantage Weaver would gain through access to undiscoverable materials.  The court found most of the material was discoverable, and the undiscoverable material was not significant enough to prejudice the case or provide unfair advantage. They did not rule on the legality or appropriateness of the conduct, only the effect of the conduct on the litigation.  Furthermore, the court explicitly did not rule on whether Weaver’s actions breached his fiduciary duty to the company. The case was remanded to the circuit court to consider the breach of loyalty claim in more detail.  Therefore, the appellate ruling did not exonerate him.


 * That said, there is no source currently that can demonstrate his conduct was inappropriate, so as a BLP matter, this material should be dropped from the article. If a later court ruling (post May 2007) or a source pointing to such a ruling is unearthed that speaks to the appropriateness of the conduct, then this can certainly be revisited. Indrian (talk) 04:25, 22 December 2022 (UTC)