Talk:David Littman (activist)

Historian
He is reported as 'historian' and some journalistic or friendly sources state so. I am sorry but a man without a PhD in hitory and without academical credits he cannot be reported as such. To be reported as historian, his work should be used and referred to by his peers. Pluto2012 (talk) 00:29, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
 * RSs report him as such. We value the views of RSs on this over the view of any individual editor. And the definition of historian does not, as you do, require a PhD.--Epeefleche (talk) 01:25, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
 * These are not WP:RS sources for stating he is an historian.
 * We need peer-reviewed references and publications for this.
 * But never mind. Pluto2012 (talk) 11:18, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

References as historian
I moved this here and kept the main one in the article :

.

Pluto2012 (talk) 11:40, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't think we can describe him as a historian. It's not just that he only has a master's degree in history. It's that his career was quite different. If he had spent his life doing historical research and publishing it, the master's wouldn't matter. The article should be moved to David Littman (activist). Itsmejudith (talk) 14:55, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh -- it's irrelevant to me whether the wp title is ... (activist) -- though we would need to redirect to that all the other references. However, in the article, the references to the fact that he is a historian are sourced appropriately to RSs (and why there are 44,000 ghits for him/historian, and why he is published by the Institute of Contemporary History) -- clearly, that's not all that he is known for, which is why using the wp name x (activist) is fine.--Epeefleche (talk) 16:05, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
 * 55600 hits - I assume he is Mulsim...
 * The "Institute of Centemporary History", ie Wiener Library is not an academic review but a Private Fund (see here)
 * Pluto2012 (talk) 20:02, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
 * There are clearly multiple RSs that indicate that he is a historian -- even not reflected in the article. RSs always trump the OR of an individual editor.  Especially where their definition of "historian" is simply their POV.--Epeefleche (talk) 20:30, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Since "historian" is an academic profession we would need academic sources. Itsmejudith (talk) 20:37, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
 * What wiki policy are you referring to when you assert that? Firkin Flying Fox (talk) 23:58, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Exactly ... that runs counter to how wp works. We need RSs.  This is sounding more and more like OR ,,, and runs counter to what the RSs say, and to what the dictionary says a historian is.--Epeefleche (talk) 03:48, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Don't be daft. A historian is someone who works as a historian. They research history, using primary sources, and write about it in books and academic journals that are discussed and reviewed by other historians. That's what being a historian is. If you can show that the subject did that, you can call him a historian. Like if someone is a notable architect we can point to some buildings they have designed. Put a list of works together, find the reviews by historians, not in political advocacy sources, then we can talk about it properly. Itsmejudith (talk) 06:56, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Don't engage in ad hominum attacks on multiple editors, who don't share your view. We follow the RSs.  For wp purposes, an historian and an architect and a librarian is someone who the RSs report is such.  We don't engage in wp:or, and review whether the librarian has only a masters degree rather than a PhD, and say that based on our OR and our personal definition (which is at odds with dictionary definitions) given that we only see evidence of a masters degree the person is not a librarian.  We go with the RSs.  Which in this case match the dictionary definition.  This isn't complicated.--Epeefleche (talk) 17:24, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
 * These sources are not RSs. They are political advocacy sources.
 * To state that someone is an historian we need academic sources.
 * Regarding the definition, we should use the one from the article Historian that comes from Princeton dictionnary here : an historian is someone whose authority is recognized. That's what Itsmejudith and I say.
 * Pluto2012 (talk) 19:22, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Pluto -- Merriam Webster if a fine dictionary. It's definition is perfectly acceptable, and there are multiple other highest-level dictionaries that share the same definition.  Which this person meets.  We don't substitute your made-up, personal preference for the clear language of Meriam Webster dictionary. Furthermore, even the Princeton (?) dictionary definition is not your made-up definition/requirement, and is one that the subject of the article meets.  Are you being serious?  Where is there a requirement of a PhD?  And yes, these are RSs, and far better for a source than your OR ... which, it seems, is completely what you are about here, as you've not proferred any support for your adamant assertion that one cannot be a historian without a PhD. Apparently, its not just OR, but silly POV hogwash.--Epeefleche (talk) 21:49, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
 * epeefleche. An historian is a person whose main job is to study history and to publish about this, ie a professional. Mr Littman main job is to be an activist. This gentleman is first know for his caritative activities but certainly not for his "publications". Pluto2012 (talk) 07:56, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Opposition to rename ?
Is there any opposition to renomve to David Littman (activist) per the suggestion here above ? Pluto2012 (talk) 18:23, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅. Pluto2012 (talk) 12:17, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Unreliable sources
I removed some content sourced to unreliable sources. This article falls under WP:BLP so extra-care must be given to ensure sources are reliable.VR talk  03:19, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on David Littman (activist). 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/20120425235150/http://www.nederlandsgesprekcentrum.nl/user/file/aphilosopheratthehumanrightscouncilartikelaustindacey-trouw.doc to http://www.nederlandsgesprekcentrum.nl/user/file/aphilosopheratthehumanrightscouncilartikelaustindacey-trouw.doc
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110810181321/http://www.sydsvenskan.se/opinion/aktuellafragor/article397547/quotRattigheter-under-attackquot.html to http://sydsvenskan.se/opinion/aktuellafragor/article397547/quotRattigheter-under-attackquot.html
 * Added tag to http://97.74.65.51/Printable.aspx?ArtId=10582
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101003071751/http://pups.paris-sorbonne.fr/pages/aff_livre.php?Id=857 to http://pups.paris-sorbonne.fr/pages/aff_livre.php?Id=857

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 23:11, 27 November 2017 (UTC)