Talk:Merlin Tuttle

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 23:46, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Merlin Tuttle. 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/20160324185313/http://virtualstampclub.com/bats.html to http://www.virtualstampclub.com/bats.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) 02:31, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Updates
Hello All,

I have been modifying the page for Merlin Tuttle, including the addition of photos, external media links, added a notes section in addition to references, reformatted citations, added sections on early life, career, and subsections on the congress avenue bridge, Smithsonian project, and National Park of Samoa.

Please take a moment to review my changes and assess the independence of information, sources, paraphrased plagiarism, or any other issues.

Thanks! (Dmil3422 (talk) 15:48, 28 October 2020 (UTC))

Too many primary sources?
I don't understand the reason for this tag. The types of primary sources that could justify this tag, such as "trial transcripts and other court records, or other public documents" are not used in this article. The only source that might fall under this tag is his self published CV? Is there any reason for keeping this tag? Or, should the three citations to his CV be removed? Sushilover2000 (talk) 16:36, 9 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Pinging, who placed the tag.
 * I assume the problem is all the citations to works that were authored by Tuttle. If so, the most problematic statement is this: "He subsequently published several academic papers based on his research, as well as numerous books about bats (many of which are aimed at lay readers)." I see two problems here. One, is this WP:DUE? If no reliable secondary sources have noticed that Tuttle published these things, are they important enough to include here? Two, this looks like WP:OR to me. None of the cited sources says that Tuttle has "published several academic papers". Instead, a WP editor has drawn that conclusion by looking at the published papers themselves. GA-RT-22 (talk) 17:12, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the quick reply. The user page for says they are deceased. It is possible to cite Google Scholar, which lists over 5000 citations to Tuttle's work, but I don't see the point of that. Works in the primary scientific literature mostly go through peer review and are heavily scrutinized. With some judicious editing, I think that tag can be removed. Sushilover2000 (talk) 18:29, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Holy shit, I'm sorry to hear that. I guess he can't defend himself now. I have no objection to removing the tag. Ideally I'd like to see some other source not authored by Tuttle, like maybe a book review for the books, but I don't think that's strictly necessary. GA-RT-22 (talk) 20:07, 9 February 2022 (UTC)