Talk:Hal Schenck

Changes over draft
you moved this to mainspace a little bit before I was done editing, as is within policy. I'd still like to add a few things to the article, but I've declared a connection, and I think the changes go beyond non-controversial. Under the circumstance, and as a one-time thing, perhaps you'd be willing to merge (or tell me to merge) part or all of the changes that I've collected in Talk:Hal Schenck/proposed? As you can see from the diffs, these changes are: I think the infobox and categories are probably non-controversial. The journals edited are a little WP:MILL, although founding a now well-established journal is probably worth mentioning (and many other articles on academics include similar editorial work). The work with veterans is not run of the mill, and seems to me worth including, but I'll comment that sourcing there isn't as strong as I'd like (though I believe it's enough for a sentence in the article). Some other (weaker) sources on work with veterans include (regarding a university-level award) and  (an Auburn press release). Russ Woodroofe (talk) 11:41, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
 * added infobox, including picture
 * added categories (well, per WP:DRAFTNOCAT)
 * add journals edited, including role in founding J. Commutative Algebra
 * add a sentence about his work helping veterans in their return to university
 * Standard practice with academics is to include any positions of editor-in-chief, but service on editorial boards, usually does not count for much & is better omitted; Presidency of a national society is included, like the AMS; but  membership or minor offices in most societies does not count for much either & are better omitted.  Honors have to be national-level to count, and to be professional level, not student level.   I don't usually include an award citation,  ""contributions to research and exposition in applications of algebraic geometry and for service to the profession," for it's essentially obvious,   tho it could be used to demonstrate that this is indeed his field, since nothing else here explicitly does.
 * I sometimes move incomplete articles on notable people as i see them, to avoid their being unwisely rejected. I'm not sure which other reviewers do similarly.  DGG ( talk ) 04:18, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for responding, and apologies if I wrote at too much length before. 1)  I did add the infobox + categories to the article - you didn't mention them, and I take them to be non-controversial.  (Revert or partially revert me if I am wrong.)  2)  Agree on editorial boards, and generally on what to omit from an academic biography.  What do you think about "He was founding editor (with Jim Coykendall) of the Journal of Commutative Algebra"?  (That is, serving on editorial boards is WP:MILL, helping to found a notable journal is probably not.)  3)  What do you think about the sentence from Talk:Hal Schenck/proposed "He has been involved in outreach to student veterans" sourced to  (IA State student paper)? Russ Woodroofe (talk) 08:30, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Helping found a notable journal is enough by itself to show notability, as an influence on the profession, and should always be included--I meant to imply this by e-in-c., But student papers are not RS, because they tend to indiscriminate coverage. There are exception, when the actually are the ones to report something important. As the WP rules have been interpreted, it is much easier to show notability as a researcher than a teacher--whether this is right of wrong, if does conform to the practices of the most famous universities.. The only awards for teaching that mean anything are national level awards, not campus level awards, or the Presidency of a national association (or , of course, writing a famous widely adopted textbook). Academic CVs nowadays list everything -- the way to write an academic faculty article in practice, is to remove all the minor material. And try to take it from the actual CV (which can take some difficulty in finding, and is usually not indexed on Google--Goggle indexes the PR pages of the university or department, which can be maddeningly nonspecific.
 * I'm explaining n detail, because I hope you will go on to write many articles on notable academics in your field, and also improve the ones you see here that need improvement, which are most of them Please keep up the good work--we need editors in this area--I'm doing too much of it by myself. . DGG ( talk ) 09:46, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the kind words! I do try to contribute, although I certainly don't do half of what you do.  I surely hear you _clearly_ on academic CVs.  Sorry to reply again, but I want to make sure I understand you (and to respect the connected contributor template).  I hear you as saying the "founding editor" sentence should go in, but the "student veterans" sentence should await better sources.  I'll go ahead and so add the "founding editor" sentence to the article; please revert me if I've misunderstood. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 10:35, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's right. Include the founding of the journal. I don't think there will be any problems, but if there are, let me know. .  DGG ( talk ) 18:45, 9 June 2021 (UTC)