Talk:Richard Kirkham

Untitled
" Among his published works cited in this encyclopedia... " ? Was this copied from somewhere else? GangofOne 09:29, 17 September 2005 (UTC)


 * No. It was not copied from somewhere else. --24.16.140.106 10:36, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Then why not link directly to those places. GangofOne 03:33, 22 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Good idea. --Nate Ladd 04:44, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

mistake
i did an unnecessary edit out of mistake, just corrected it.--Greece666 21:57, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Removing BLP tag: (was No Published Biographies of this Person)
I removed the unsourced tag because there are no published biographies of this person. These are not required for Notability:Academic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yossui (talk • contribs) 16:08, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
 * The tag describes the actual state of the article and as a community we have decided not to have unreferenced biographies of living people, academic or not. This is independent of the notability argument. Had the article been created from scratch it would even be subject to Proposed deletion of biographies of living people. I've reinserted the tag as it helps projects such as Unreferenced BLP Rescue Please do not remove it again without adding a a good source. If there aren't then why should we have a biography here? --Tikiwont (talk) 16:17, 23 March 2011 (UTC)


 * I have found a newspaper article and a book that praise one of his books, so I've added footnotes to them in the article and I will be removing the BLP tag. BTW, I don't agree with your statement that "as a community we have decided not to have unreferenced biographies of living people". I've just read BLP and it definitely does not require that all bios be sourced. It requires sources only for material that is contentious and likely to be challenged. Neither of those scenarios has ever applied to this article. Sourcing is in general desirable for any wikipedia article, of course; but it is not an absolute requirement. Bios of academics is a great example of when sourcing shouldn't be required. For most academics, the only notable things they've done are their publications and, hence, the bibliograpical references to these are the only referencing needed. Yossui (talk) 01:45, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
 * If you actually check the links above, I wasn't referring to WP:BLP but to a policy that i) would make the same bio deletable if just created and ii) to a community drive to reference any previously created BLP. As the restoring administrator I felt responsible that it does not fall between these two by someone merely removing the tag without not even bother to link properly to the publications. Moreover, while I agree to some extent with your statement that academics are mostly known for their publications, we cannot simply call them notable without having something to say on their impact. Now thankfully you've added something and I trust you on the correctness and remove the tag, with no prejudice against a more thorough assessment of his impact. Still I feel uncomfortable about a 'biography' that ends with a PhD and doesn't even have an institutional academic CV.--Tikiwont (talk) 08:37, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 04:24, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Vanity
Looks like a vanity article to me. 87.114.96.125 (talk) 11:52, 8 November 2011 (UTC)