Talk:Jeffrey Lewis (academic)

Conflict of interest disclosure
The first / primary author of this article is User:Georgewilliamherbert (me). I know Jeffrey Lewis and have corresponded and worked informally with him a bit for some years now. I believe that his contributions meet the applicable notability guidelines and that this article cites references for all non-trivial claims and information. I however do possess a Conflict of Interest with the subject of the article, and ethics and Wikipedia policy require disclosure of this. Per Conflict of interest I am declaring this conflict and am fully open to independent review of the article (as I am for all my work, but with expectations of additional scrutiny). Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 03:26, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Pile of citations
George, this: "Lewis has been repeatedly cited as an expert on nuclear programs of China, North Korea, Iran, Pakistan, and South Africa in the media.[4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15]" is really bad editing. Please know that passing mentions don't count toward NOTABILITY, if that is what you are trying to accomplish - so a brief mention and a quote don't get you there.

Also: a) you are adding content to the lead that is not in the body which is not what WP:LEAD is about (it is a summary of the body, and that's all); and b) it is basically promotional and adds no value to understanding the guy.

Instead of doing that, can you add content to the body of the article and use those sources in a meaningful way? Jytdog (talk) 20:06, 12 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Cited as an expert repeatedly (and in general, most of the time the mainstream press covers those specific topics...) by the independent journalists covering the field does count towards notability, which was explicitly challenged elsewhere, so I am remedying that. However...
 * It is unquestionably not great writing, style, form, layout, or MOS compatibility (cough - to put it mildly, it does suck now), and should move down further into the body. I was taking an eventualist "put it in now organize and rewrite later" approach but the resultant ref-block is not precisely a good thing or very pretty.  I believe they're all relevant to both the topics and notability, however...
 * I have been thinking about overall format, wondering what an appropriate layout would be for the research areas and coverage etc. I was thinking that perhaps country or program specific writings and coverage grouped by country/program would be the best stylistic way to handle that.  I.e., a North Korea section, summarizing what he's done and believes regarding North Korea's weapons and missile programs, citing his specific writings and other media references to North Korea topics, grouped together; and so on through the other countries/programs.
 * Do you think that's a good approach? I haven't seen a good consistent style for analysts / policy people who cover related but separate subtopics, this makes sense to me (at least, to try out and see how it works) but it's just my first reasonable-to-me idea not the best way.
 * I'm happy to try it (later today or over the weekend) and see how it works but feedback beforehand would be helpful.
 * Thanks. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 20:31, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
 * ok this is a (cough) better conversation than we are having at COIN, so that is happy. :) i could see it going either way, by program or country. this is draft space so plenty of room to play, which i will back off and let you do!  Jytdog (talk) 20:46, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Yeah. I'm sorry if I'm coming across too confrontationally on COIN, but this topic area needs work.  Seriously, work with me for a while on this one, see if you think I'm being reasonable and NPOV and understand the issues, throw things at me if I seem to go off the rails and call for others to review if I don't listen.  Hopefully both the article and your impression of my editing will be good after some exposure.  I sincerely hope that constructive independent review and criticism helps, and that you see that I do listen.  8-)  Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 21:00, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

draft cruft
copying here from the article with sections made into subsections.

Other countries
needs to be made into content before it goes back in. Jytdog (talk) 17:11, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Jeffrey Lewis (academic). 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://newamerica.net/programs/american_strategy/nuclear_strategy_and_nonproliferation_initiative

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 20:46, 31 March 2016 (UTC)