Talk:Michael H. Hart

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
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.
WikiProject Physics This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, which collaborates on articles related to physics.
Stub This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the assessment scale.
??? This article has not yet received an importance rating within physics.

Help with this template This article has been rated but has no comments. If appropriate, please review the article and leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

[edit] Deletion discussion

This article has been listed on Wikipedia:Votes for deletion in the past. See /deletion for the discussion archive.


The assertions that his book was on the best-seller list are unsubstantiated. The separate article The_100_(book) on the book gives a re-issue date 1992, but here's the NY Times list of top books for 1992: Revolution from Within by Gloria Steinem (Little, Brown) - February 9, 1992

Give War a Chance by P. J. O'Rourke (Atlantic Monthly) - May 10, 1992

The Silent Passage by Gail Sheehy (Random House) - June 7, 1992

Diana: Her True Story by Andrew Morton (Simon & Schuster) - July 5, 1992

Every Living Thing by James Herriot (St. Martin's) - September 13, 1992

The Way Things Ought to Be by Rush H. Limbaugh (Pocket) - September 27, 1992

Sex by Madonna (Warner) - November 8, 1992

A search of the whole NY times list did not produce the name of Dr. Hart's book. Of course it could have been #5 or #6 - if so document it.Carrionluggage 04:17, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Recent edits

  • The bibliography is not the place for discussion of the faults of a book. We can start a paragraph discussing his individual works, but I'm not sure the fact that a later edition of one work was not sufficently updated in the mind of one reviewer is significant enough for an encyclopedia article on the author.
  • The man worked for NASA, no? He taught physics, no? Then he's a physicist. "Claimed astrophysicist" is waaaay too loaded and POV. Since he's a full time writer now, I believe, it really doesn't matter if he's not a member of professional physics organizations, and there is no source for this anyway. Gamaliel 02:24, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 1994

The article mentions that "At a 1994 conference, he had a public confrontation with former Klansman and former Louisiana politician David Duke", probably because the linked splcenter.org article says "At the latest edition of the conferences that began in 1994, held this February at the Hyatt Dulles hotel, a nasty spat broke out that upset the gathering's decorum". Since the article has no date we have no idea which February is "this February", but it is probably not 1994... --CrisDias 17:54, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I had a look at that SPLC article. It's dated "Summer 2006"--so, given the "this February" you point out, 2006 seems pretty darn indisputable for a date. Iralith (talk) 16:22, 28 May 2008 (UTC)