User talk:Curt.rice

conflict of interest
If you are Curt Rice, read Conflict of interest as you consider what to add to the article about you. Runner1928 (talk) 23:04, 1 April 2015 (UTC)


 * I'm such a neophyte on Wikipedia that I can't even figure out how to reply to this comment. On the outside chance this is the way to do it, let me just say thanks for drawing my attention to that policy. I don't actually think I've violated it, since I changed the picture and added a phrase about my wife's occupation. Do you think I've violated it? Curt.rice (talk) 00:11, 2 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Curt, thanks for the quick reply. This is definitely the right place to reply. Sometimes editors like to leave comments on their own talk pages, or on other people's, or on articles' talk pages. Whatever is appropriate for the individual conversation is fine. What WP:COI is looking for is disclosure when you edit pages for which you have a potential conflict, as well as refraining from making controversial edits on those pages. I think your contributions so far have been fine. You could add to the talk page of your article (Talk:Curt Rice) to declare the potential COI. Then make sure to provide completely independent sources for everything you contribute. Oh, and welcome back to Wikipedia! We're glad to have you! Runner1928 (talk) 00:32, 2 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks :) I now have pasted in the code you sent on the talk page. I thought I should possibly be explicit there about what changes I've made, but that doesn't seem to be the structure of the talk page, and I suppose it's redundant anyway since the changes can be seen on the edit version of the page itself. Or am I missing something? This English page seemed to magically appear after a little media action last week connected to my new job - maybe you even got the ball rolling? I understand the need for the COI rules though, given the temptation to jump in and add more or less my whole CV and life story ... knowing how incredibly interested the rest of the world must be in that ;) Now I'm trying a different logic with myself: stay away and see what others think is worth mentioning. Curt.rice (talk) 10:13, 2 April 2015 (UTC)


 * You're right: media attention is important. Wikipedia isn't supposed to be an exhaustive compendium of everything. Instead, we follow some guidelines:
 * Neutral point of view
 * No original research
 * Verifiable
 * Living people biographies
 * You've had a Norwegian Wikipedia article since 2010, and you were potentially notable on English Wikipedia. Notability for academics follows the Notability (academics) policy. But two things happened recently: first, you were appointed to the rectorship, fulfilling criterion 6 of the aforementioned policy, and second, you received multiple independent verifiable attention from English-language journalists. That made you very likely notable, and so I created the English Wikipedia article. You're right to refrain from editing the article about you, however: Wikipedia editors will remove content deemed to be autobiographical or written like a CV, and it's very difficult to get the balance right when it's your own life. So if you want something added, the best option is to request it via the Talk page at Talk:Curt Rice. (If you're interested, I live in the Twin Cities and follow the Star Tribune on Twitter. They tweeted their article on your appointment as rector, and I searched Wikipedia for more information about you. When I didn't find an article, I decided to start it.)
 * I hope you're as excited about Wikipedia as we are, and find some articles on subjects that interest you where there's no COI. Perhaps Rochester, Minnesota, or phonology or Norway–United States relations (where there's a section on Norwegian Americans but not yet American Norwegians). If and when you contribute, especially about linguistics, find sources that aren't you. For instance, is there a canonical list of academic work on linguistics that isn't fully represented on Wikipedia? You could use your education to further those articles. E.g., I created the Bibliography of South Dakota history list article. You could also translate Norwegian Wikipedia articles into English.
 * Once again, we're happy to have you and hope you find the community interesting and valuable. Please reach out with any questions. Runner1928 (talk) 16:07, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for all this; it's very interesting. I looked also at a kind of Wikipedia project page about getting more Norwegian stuff visible in the English Wikipedia and there are a few things on the "wishlist" I could contribute to. But maybe my bigger contribution can be in my new job, e.g. by creating opportunities for students to get into creating/editing/contributing to pages.

WikiEdu
Curt, that's a great idea. Your current position affords you more impact than editing individual articles. See the good folks at the Education program and at WikiEdu. They're liaisons between the Wikimedia Foundation and universities. If your new institution isn't a partner, they'd love to work with you! Runner1928 (talk) 20:38, 8 April 2015 (UTC)


 * I wonder if you can advise me on the correct approach to dealing with factual errors posted on the bio page that is about me. In earlier versions, it said "He is the first non-Norwegian to head any Norwegian university or college." It was subsequently changed to read, "He is not the first non-Norwegian to head a Norwegian university or college, as the University of Oslo has had several non-Norwegian chancellors." That was added without a reference. It is factually incorrect that the U. of Oslo has had several non-Norwegian chancellors. The link I have for comparing these two versions is https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Curt_Rice&type=revision&diff=696688823&oldid=662848420.


 * One source of evidence is this list on the Norwegian Wikipedia site of the 21 rectors of the University of Oslo, https://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kategori:Rektorer_ved_Universitetet_i_Oslo. Each of them has a link to a personal biography, and each of them is asserted in those biographies to be Norwegian.


 * A couple of other factual errors have been introduced, but they are much smaller. I understand from our earlier correspondence that I should not make these changes myself due to the potential appearance of a conflict of interest, but is there a way to trigger a review by a neutral editor? Thanks ... Curt  Curt.rice