Talk:Marc Seifer

Untitled
I think there may be some NPOV issues here as the only reference source is the mans own websitePetebutt (talk) 22:21, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

hard to read
Is there any good reason to put everything in just one sentence?


 * "In Wizard: The Life & Times of Nikola Tesla, a history of modern technology and mass communication is presented along with a precise timeline of Tesla’s life and achievements, his historical and technical role as principle architect of the modern age, the reasons why his name disappeared from the history books, why Marconi lost his suit against the Navy for patent infringement in wireless, a clear explanation of Tesla’s relationship with J. Pierpont Morgan which explains why his turn of the century world telegraphy system, Wardenclyffe, eventually failed and the trail of his secret papers."

this is torture.

and yes this page reads like advertisement. I hope Marc Seifer didnt pay for this. 77.64.141.24 (talk) 19:07, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia as a Vanity Press | Fundamental Misuse of this Venue
If Seifer is an expert on Tesla then his writings could be used as a citation on Tesla If Seofer is a handwriting expert than his writings or appearances could be used as a citation on that subject. This entry has correctly been nominated on deletion. If it is not deleted it will need to be reduced to what can be verified by primary sources in fact, and no more.

In this entry we have a resume of Seifer which is of interest to Seifer, and this represents a major misuse of Wikipeida.

--Lfrankblam 20:24, 24 October 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lfrankbalm (talk • contribs)

Unsourced puffery
Unsourced content is subject to removal. Insignificant details likewise. Puffery has got to go. I suppose the best way to go is first tag all the unsourced content then come back and cut it. The article already has a general tag/header. - - MrBill3 (talk) 10:53, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
 * -will start to remove un-sourced or irrelevant information--Lfrankblam (talk) 02:21, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Self published Biography
"He has a B.S. from the University of Rhode Island, five semesters of graphology from New School University, an M.A. from the University of Chicago and a Ph.D. from Saybrook Institute. With over 35 years experience as a handwriting expert including a decade of work for the Fraud Unit of the Rhode Island Attorney General’s Office, he has lectured before the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners and testified in civil, criminal, state superior and federal court. Dr. Seifer is also a writer and visiting lecturer in Psychology at Roger Williams University." --Lfrankblam (talk) 03:21, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

This unfortunately is unusable as a self published source.--Lfrankblam (talk) 03:57, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Concise, Quality Citations, NPOV {what is needed next}
The Marc Seifer entry is now concise, fully cited - with quality citations, what he is known for is emphasis without alliteration, and most of all it meets the standard of NPOV. Editing this article now assures me that this person is notable, which simply was not visible before all the puffery. When you say less it can mean more..

So what is missing;

1) I am very sure that Seifer is a PHD, and that he has a PHD in Psychology; to include this credential would require a source that could be cited. Unfortunately, the link from R&W did not include any credentials.

2) I would like to see a credential relating to handwriting analysis.--Lfrankblam (talk) 03:56, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

3) I would like to see ISBN's on all the major works--Lfrankblam (talk) 04:09, 2 November 2014 (UTC)


 * I'm not so sure about the current sources. 1) A google search and a conclusion drawn from it is not in keeping with policy as a search is not a published reliable source and making a conclusion based on a search is original research. It could be used to support an argument on talk but is not an acceptable basis for content. 2) A guest profile on the website of a radio show is completely primary for the subject being a guest on that radio show. If not reported in reliable sources the primary evidence does not support content. If no reliable source considers it notable enough to mention, it doesn't exactly qualify as encyclopedic. 3) Likewise a university faculty page is primary for supporting content that on the subject's position at that university. A minor position at a relatively minor university is not encyclopedic information unless a secondary reliable source finds it important enough to publish.
 * The external links hold some potential. I think Kendall 2009 notes that the subject did 20 years of research for the Tesla book. Ghose 2014 is not the strongest source but could be grouped with several others to support saying the subject is considered an expert on Tesla.
 * I think I saw an article (possibly on HighBeam) that discussed the subject relative to graphology. I suspect another source or two may be found. If not asserting too much about graphology itself moderate quality sources could be used to support that the subject in involved in it. I quality source for the subject's doctorate would be good. I haven't found any at this point. - - MrBill3 (talk) 12:46, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
 * This: calls the subject, "U.S.-based handwriting expert". Kind of tangential but it does support involvement in the field of handwriting analysis. - - MrBill3 (talk) 13:14, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
 * The book on Tesla was reviewed in Nature which some would consider notable. - - MrBill3 (talk) 13:23, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Cosmopolitan says, "Narragansett, Rhode Island's Marc Seifer has testified in forgery cases." in: - - MrBill3 (talk) 13:42, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
 * From The Economist, "Graphologists can recognise mental problems such as schizophrenia or severe epilepsy. For example, in two separate experiments Dr Marc Seifer, a psychologist from Rhode Island, was able to distinguish people with these conditions from controls who had been matched for social class, intelligence and personal history. His findings with epileptics were repeated by Ms Patricia Siegel, a graphologist from the New School for Social Research in New York." The context of this should be noted as it was provided as a counterpoint in an article largely skeptical of graphology about a proposed law to ban it's use in court in Rhode Island. The article starts, "Many people regard graphology, the study of handwriting and character, in the same eerie light as astrology and numerology." and includes the telling statements, "Dr Seifer, who has recently presented evidence to the Rhode Island legislature, acknowledges the lack of controlled studies." and "Dr Seifer says that most graphologists are more concerned with doing graphology than proving that it works." - - MrBill3 (talk) 13:56, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Marc Seifer. 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/20130521095931/http://www.rwu.edu/academics/schools-colleges/fcas/faculty/marc-seifer to http://rwu.edu/academics/schools-colleges/fcas/faculty/marc-seifer

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) 09:28, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Qualifications?
Seifer has presented papers at Tesla conferences, and was billed as Dr Seifer. Why is it not mentioned here? Is it a genuine doctorate and, even if not awarded by a degree-mill, was it awarded by a reputable body and not by an alternative-health or quasi-religious organization? What indeed are his qualifications in graphology: graphologists are not the same thing as handwriting experts and the former are generally viewed as being part of the 'woo' industry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.2.156.175 (talk) 12:13, 8 June 2020 (UTC)