Talk:John Henry Clippinger

Should this article exist?
This is an orphan article written by an SPA, with the only sourced material being the title of books. He appears to have stared a company that I'm not finding much on, except that he was no longer president of it by 1988. He's been involved in projects, some of which seem to have disappeared. I haven't put full study into it, but if someone has an obvious, sourcable reason why this person deserves an article, please put it forward. (Also, article should almost certainly be moved to drop the "Jr."; while there is a book where he uses that, there is also one with a "III" on it, and the current references seem to drop that altogether.) ---Nat Gertler (talk) 14:47, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

Yes it should exist
John Clippinger is a scientist at MIT Media Lab and formerly was co-director of The Law Lab at Harvard University, a multi-disciplinary project founded to research the role of social, neurological, and economic mechanisms on the role of law in facilitating cooperation and entrepreneurial innovation.

Previously, Dr. Clippinger directed the Social Physics project at the Berkman Center at Harvard that supported the development of an open-source, interoperability identity framework called Higgins to give people control over their personal information. Dr. Clippinger also directed multi-disciplinary research and workshops to explore the impact of trust, reciprocity, reputation, social signalling on the formation of digital institutions. He is the author of A Crowd of One: The Future of Individual Identity (Perseus, Public Affairs, 2007).

Dr. Clippinger is a graduate of Yale University and holds a Ph.D. from the University of Pennsylvania. He is a frequent participant at The Highlands Forum, The Aspen Institute, the CEO Leadership Institute of Yale School of Management, Creative Leadership Summit, Aspen Institute Italy, Fortune Brainstorm, Arab Thought Leadership Conference, World Economic Forum, Supernova, Diamond Exchange, TII/Vanguard, and The Santa Fe Institute Business Network.

Do you really have to tar his name with this objection? I mean if one can't put one of America's leading intellectuals with a track record as a scientist at both Harvard and MIT what does constitute good reason? A reality TV star maybe? Or a serial killer? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rkastelein (talk • contribs) 02:59, 4 March 2020 (UTC) subsequently added signature: Caribmon (talk) 10:48, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
 * It's not tarring someone's name to question if they should have a Wikipedia article. Many good people do not and should not have Wikipedia articles; the standard for having a Wikipedia article is not whether one is a good human being.
 * You may wish to review WP:NBIO and see if you can indicate any sources that will affirm his import. Currently, this article is a mass of unsourced information that should probably be deleted until a source can be provided. --Nat Gertler (talk) 03:54, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

I have reviewed and rewritten
There are a number of pages referring to John Clippinger sans the Henry and Junior. And I added links to a lot of material and took out the work I could not find online. Caribmon (talk) 10:50, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Common name
This page was recently moved from John Henry Clippinger, Jr. to John Clippinger. However, the guideline for what the page should be named is WP:COMMON, which calls us to rely on what he is most commonly called... and his books all have either Henry or H., and most of the external links have one or the other. I recommend moving it to John Henry Clippinger. (A redirect would be left in place so that any existing links to John Clippinger will come here.) Any objectionso or counter-suggestions? --Nat Gertler (talk) 14:04, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

The tags
This article is currently tagged for not having enough sources, for not having third-party references, and for the question of notability. There have been repeated attempts recently to delete these tags without these problems actually having been addressed. These tags are there to encourage editing the article into a proper state, and should not be removed until the problems themselves are eliminated. --Nat Gertler (talk) 18:48, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The lack of sufficient sources is blatant. Most of the information in this article has no sources cited at all. The entire "Early life" section? Zero citations. The entire "Graduate school and early career" section? One citation that gives source to half a sentence, identifying a book that the subject wrote.
 * The lack of third-party references is obvious: All of the references that appear in the current article are to books or website that he was a contributor to or organizations he is involved in. None of these are third-party references.
 * The lack of notability goes hand-in-hand with the lack of third-party sources. Wikipedia notability standards are built less around being worthy of note and more around being noted, and so far we have no evidence in this article that reliable third-party sources have noted this guy.