Talk:Dale K. Van Kley

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Stub This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is supported by the Science and academia work group.
This article has been automatically assessed as Stub-Class by WikiProject Biography because it uses a stub template.
  • If you agree with the assessment, please remove {{WPBiography}}'s auto=yes parameter from this talk page.
  • If you disagree with the assessment, please change it by editing the class parameter of the {{WPBiography}} template, removing {{WPBiography}}'s auto=yes parameter from this talk page, and removing the stub template from the article.

[edit] External links

The ratemyprofessors link, although I agree that that site has serious problems in terms of students lying about and smearing professors, nevertheless is at least somewhat, albeit not entirely accurate, of an insight into what students write about any given professor. I do not see how it violates any policy. Please discuss your concerns here if you have a more clear reason why it shouldn't be here, don't just cite some page, cite a speicfic reference from that page that specifically criticizes this link before unilaterally removing it. If you provide a convincing argument, then perhaps myself and other editors of this page will be happy to compromise. Sincerely, --172.145.250.228 03:05, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

First a clarification, at no point have I reverted wording, as has been claimed. My recent edits, the two of the past 24 hours, involve nothing more than the removal of the ratemyprofessors.com link for Dale K. Van Kley. In the first I reverted an edit made without summary by 140.254.225.30. In doing so, I provided the reason behind the reversion. Within three hours, 140.254.225.30 again added the link. The user provided no edit summary, no comment, no discussion, nor was there a query as to my reasoning.
I am not the only user to argue that ratemyprofessor has no place in this article, nor am I the only one to cite Wikipedia's policy concening external links [1][2]. The second sentence of this policy states: "Such pages could contain further research that is accurate and on-topic..." I maintain that an external link consisting of ratings and comments posted anonymously by individuals who may or may not have studied under the professor in question is anything but accurate. I also point to the section titled links to normally be avoided, which states: "one should avoid... Any site that misleads the reader by use of factually inaccurate material or unverifiable research." I would argue that a rating site which has, to quote 172.145.250.228 "serious problems in terms of students lying about and smearing professors," fits this discription. Victoriagirl 07:51, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Note to other editors. Looking that the history of this page, it is clear that a single editor, unfamiliar with our policies and unwilling to learn them, wants to insert this external link. It's also clear that the IP address changes. If this gets out of hand, you can file a request for page protection. If you request semi-protection, the article can be edited only by logged in users. Bucketsofg 03:43, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Hello! I created this article and anyway, I agree that ratemyprofessors ia s really problematic site that we cannot trust as a reliable source. So, I support NOT re-adding that link. Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles 17:29, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Good news of sorts! We have consensus. I cuncur with the above. After reading some of the libelous, hurtful garbage that "people" post as ratings on that site, I now whole-heartedly agree that it is not reliable. Therefore, I will not restore that link to the article. Also, I'll do my best to remember adding edit summaries. Enjoy the summer; it's sizzlin where I'm at! --140.254.225.30 20:27, 5 July 2007 (UTC)