Talk:John Gill (climber)

Reorg by Fehrmann
Good job! Ratagonia (talk) 21:27, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on John Gill (climber). 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 tag to http://johnhaas.us/bhs/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100527165423/http://www.mesastate.edu/mathstat/CATCF.html to http://www.mesastate.edu/mathstat/CATCF.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130819042640/http://americanalpineclub.org/p/underhill-award to http://www.americanalpineclub.org/p/underhill-award
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080604192022/http://www.climbing.lu/index.php?page=gill to http://www.climbing.lu/index.php?page=gill

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) 20:41, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on John Gill (climber). 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/20100527165423/http://www.mesastate.edu/mathstat/CATCF.html to http://www.mesastate.edu/mathstat/CATCF.html

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) 20:05, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Undue weight?
Gill was most notable for his influence in rock climbing, but the article devotes a lot of space to his academic career and mathematics research. Are there any secondary sources showing that Gill's mathematics research was influential or otherwise notable? Similarly for the Gymnastics and strength exercises section.

Also, the section Magazine articles & interiviews is quite messy — should that be cleaned up in a bulleted list, or removed entirely? Stonkaments (talk) 20:26, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree with you re what he is notable for. I think the "Early life and professional career" section is at an appropriate level of detail regarding his mathematical work, and important for understanding his life story, but the "Mathematical research" section is overdetailed, overly technical for much of the likely audience (climbers who might want to know some background about what Gill did professionally), and entirely primary-sourced. The primary sourcing can be addressed (most of these papers are likely to have independently-written and published reviews in MathSciNet and zbMATH) but instead I think maybe removing the whole research section would be an improvement. Additionally, the first paragraph of the "early life" section needs better sourcing. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:29, 21 July 2020 (UTC)