Talk:Dave Snowden/Archive 2

Dave Snowden is not in the first source?
the first source gives an address for a business, but does not mention Dave, I suggest we remove the citation until the link is repaired. Darkstar1st (talk) 01:26, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Source supports the existence of the company. If you seriously doubt my link to that ... Snowded  TALK 07:13, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
 * the article is not about a company? Darkstar1st (talk) 13:49, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
 * No it is about a person, myself to be precise and I am CSO and founder of that company so I think it is relevant If you want to remove a source but leave the statement I've got no personal issue with that but ...  Snowded  TALK 16:53, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
 * but it seemed a bit confusing for the reader. they click the link supporting the sentence, and get an address instead, no bio,, no article, nothing reported by bloomberg, just a listing in a business directory. since the truth of the statement is no in question, does it even need a source? is there no other RS that could support that statement? Darkstar1st (talk) 01:27, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't think it would take you long to find one, most of the articles specify it Snowded  TALK 13:44, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Request edit on 22 November 2016
I'd like another editor to review the mass removal of references from the article. The reason given is that there was no direct reference, but in the majority of cases the reference provided support for factual statements, or links to organisations. I'm not a specialist BLP editor and the content hasn't been changed. However it would be good if someone can take a look - thanks Snowded  TALK 15:12, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I've reverted the article, as you'll see. The arguments given for source removal appear to be a weak, but I haven't reviewed each removed source separately. The user who removed them may well have his own agenda. Each proposed removal should be justified more rigorously than has been the case in the above section. MidnightBlue   (Talk)  19:31, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Specifically, reverted to this version  MidnightBlue   (Talk)  19:36, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
 * the first source contains the following, pleases explain why you added this back when there is no mention of the founder, CSO, or Dave Snowden: Company Profile Sector: Consumer Discretionary Industry: Commercial Services Sub-Industry: Professional Services Cognitive Edge Pte. Ltd. was founded in 2005. The company's line of business includes providing business consulting services on a contract or fee basis.
 * The context of the disputed reference can be seen here: He is the founder and chief scientific officer of Cognitive Edge, a consulting company[1], the comma after the word 'Edge' being significant. Clearly the reference is to support the assertion that Cognitive Edge is indeed a consulting company. It is an RS, third party reference. Without it, you can be fairly sure that some smartass would come along to claim that CE aren't a 'consulting company', or at least tag it for a reference. The removed reference covered this possibility; I suggest you reinstate it. As to my removal of broken links, well yes, but I did say that I hadn't checked all the references. However, in removing them, did you first try and fix the links or look for an alternative source? BTW, and no offence intended, but do you fall into the category described in banner number 6, above?  MidnightBlue   (Talk)  12:48, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Cognitive edge is not the subject, nor is it being a consulting company notable. Next time, please review what you are reverting. None taken and no. Darkstar1st (talk) 13:37, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
 * The WP:BRD policy applies here. You boldly removed a load of references (broken ones excepted, if you tried to fix them, but couldn't), I reverted their removal, so now we're at the discussion stage. Please put them back and we'll take them one at a time. MidnightBlue   (Talk)  14:15, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
 * OBE. An editor has been on the scene. I was going to post the dispute on the Bio of Living Persons noticeboard, but seems like there's no need now. MidnightBlue   (Talk)  21:22, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Birth date
Why was Snowden's birth month & day removed? GoodDay (talk) 17:37, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I removed it because I'd sourced it to Companies House, but it violated WP:BLPPRIMARY in several ways. That issue apart, finding independent sources for any of the text here has been a problem. SarahSV (talk) 21:39, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Request edit on 16 April 2018
Thanks to those who have handled one of the periodic bouts of vandalism on this article. My request is to replace "knowledge management" with "applied complexity" in the lede or similar (happy to keep a KM reference). It's been years since I worked other than very occasionally in that field and my most referenced article (The HBR one in 2007) along with 90% of my lectures and other work is on complexity theory in organisations. For a third party source the map here (which has been used on wikipedia for years) has just been updated and directly references me under that title - its top right. -Snowded TALK 09:23, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

In that context I'd also note this petty minded edit some time ago - valid addition but used to mask a deletion by an editor with a long standing conflict on the Cynefin article as well as here.
 * Please provide sources for the changes you'd like to see made. These references should also delineate, with great specificity, the differences between "knowledge management" and "applied complexity", and why those differences justify a change in language to this article -- keeping in mind that some editors may require the use of layman's terms in order to understand a field which may be foreign to them. When ready to proceed, please reopen a new edit request. Regards, 0.82em 16:13, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Well Knowledge management is well defined in the wikipedia article of that name. Complexity is also defined and the link I provided is to a third party source which provides a comprehensive map of the field; that identifies my work as a subset  namely 'applied complexity'. I'm not sure why you are asking me for a source when I have provided it.  Links to the relevant wikipedia articles illustrate the difference between the fields.   If you check the citations in this article you will find that the majority refer to my work in complexity not KM.  The purpose of a BLP article is to apply labels not to explain what they mean when other articles do that adequately.   -Snowded TALK 02:12, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
 * What is needed is a reference to verify the information which you would like to be added. You suggested checking another Wikipedia article in order to get that information, but Wikipedia is not a reliable source, per WP:NOTSOURCE. The map in particular which you mentioned, I see the information is linked to the picture, and you mentioned that your name is in the top right quadrant of the picture. But I'm not sure why you cant just provide those links here. Having editors search for information that you could more easily provide works against garnering assistance for these changes rather than for assistance. What is needed is for you to provide assistance by supplying outside references that substantiate the information you wish to have added to the article, rather than having others perform this work for you. Regards,  0.82em 02:41, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I referenced a third party source used in that article rather than the article itself but that may not have been clear. I have over 30k edits here covering more than 3k articles the last twelve years so I do know about WP:NOTSOURCE :-) Given controversies over this page, persistent vandalism and trolling I was cautious about suggesting the exact words to be used.   But I think you are saying that would be the preference in which case fine, I will do that over the weekend. -Snowded TALK 08:16, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I found Dave Snowden's name on the map, but when I click on it, the link says page not found. When I click on Applied Complexity it takes me to necsi.edu, but a google search of the term Dave Snowden appearing at that domain does not return any results. Are either of these references the ones you're referring to? Please advise. 0.82em 09:42, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I guess the map's link needs to be updated with the new url. So to summarize, the request here is to change the term from knowledge management to applied complexity. My question asks, is the study of complex systems generally referred to as applied complexity by a predominance of those working in the field? I ask this because I want to ensure that the nomenclature used in my edits reflects that of the field as a whole. For example, I would be sure to take some flack if I had made an edit calling those who adjust a person's braces in their mouth dentists instead of orthodontists. If applied complexity is an example of nomenclature used by only a few people in this field, and not the majority, then that might raise questions of why the subject wanted that term used, a term which is also the name of the subject's organization. I'm sure that is not the case here. But allow me to ask, would you foresee any problems with using the subject's own website to confirm that this is how the term is referred to? Or would you want an outside source to confirm the nomenclature used by this field of study? Also keep in mind that if this term is truly universal, then there should be many more places than just this map for me to look to for confirmation. Being the experienced Wikipedian that you are, I'm sure you know that the burden of proof for restoring deleted information in BLP articles is on those who wish to retain, restore, or undelete the disputed material. Not being familiar myself with where these references could be found, I would appreciate any assistance you could provide in this regard. Thank you! 0.82em 10:10, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Odd symbol
What is the symbol Snowden is wearing around his neck in the picture accompanying the article? Is it some kind of decoration? Downley Head (talk) 22:51, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Its a Maoiri kite oh troll - Untouched World can supply -Snowded TALK 07:01, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Request edit on 2 April 2020
The application of complexity science in a range of fields has been far more significant than knowledge management over the last decade. this map is one supporting reference and also Rosenhead et al Complexity theory and leadership practice in The Leadership Quarterly identifies my HBR paper with Boone as one of the top ten cited papers on Complexity and Leadership (August 2019) So the request is to replace 'knowledge management" with "Knowledge management and the application of complexity science" or similar -Snowded TALK 06:48, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Seems reasonable, ✅. Altamel (talk) 01:06, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Request edit on 10 February 2021
Request addition of something along the lines of:

In February 2021 he co-authored Managing complexity (and chaos) in times of crisis A field guide for decision makers inspired by the Cynefin framework. The publication as a shared effort between the Joint Research Centre (JRC), the European Commission’s science and knowledge service, and the Cynefin Centre. It aims to provide sense-making support to the European policymaking process.

Snowden, D. and Rancati, A., Managing complexity (and chaos) in times of crisis. A field guide for decision makers inspired by the Cynefin framework, Smith, B., Snowden, E., Winthagen, V., Andriani, P. and Caspari, A. editor(s), Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2020, JRC123629.

https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC123629

---Snowded</b> <small style="color: #708090; font-family: Baskerville;">TALK 13:26, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Request edit on 10 February 2021
Request addition of something along the lines of:

In February 2021 he co-authored Managing complexity (and chaos) in times of crisis A field guide for decision makers inspired by the Cynefin framework. The publication as a shared effort between the Joint Research Centre (JRC), the European Commission’s science and knowledge service, and the Cynefin Centre. It aims to provide sense-making support to the European policymaking process.

Snowden, D. and Rancati, A., Managing complexity (and chaos) in times of crisis. A field guide for decision makers inspired by the Cynefin framework, Smith, B., Snowden, E., Winthagen, V., Andriani, P. and Caspari, A. editor(s), Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2020, JRC123629.

https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC123629

---<b style="color: #801818; font-family: Papyrus;">Snowded</b> <small style="color: #708090; font-family: Baskerville;">TALK 13:26, 13 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Hi . Could you please provide a third party independent source? The article already relies far to heavily on primary sources and this one seems to be too quite closely affiliated with you.Melmann 21:49, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
 * European commission publication web site is surely independent and sufficiently notable? It's a recent publication and no claim is made other than it has been published. Otherwise as far as I can see the primary references are only to articles which is normal -<b style="color: #801818; font-family: Papyrus;">Snowded</b> <small style="color: #708090; font-family: Baskerville;">TALK 15:56, 19 March 2021 (UTC)