Talk:Tara C. Smith
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] | ||
 |
This article is supported by the Science and academia work group. | ||
 |
A fact from Tara C. Smith appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on 13 August 2007. |
 |
[edit] Clean up needed
I have started. Any other ideas? Thanks, --Tom 12:43, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
- User:DGG said that any reviews of books that she is involved with must be included. You disagree?--Filll 12:45, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
- Yes.--Tom 12:51, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
- (Filll asked me to comment-DGG) They are not necessary in order for the books to be listed, they are necessary if notability is to be based on publishing them, because one becomes notable by publishing important books, not any books at all. But in this case there is a special consideration. The books are supplemental reading for courses, & the libraries that hold them colleges & public libraries, not research libraries. If they can be shown to be required in a number of courses at different places, this meets one of the standards for WP:PROF. I do this by looking in Google limited to .edu and checking likely hits. DGG (talk) 14:53, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
- The first review links to a pay site. Is it really necessary? The 2nd review links to a blog and again, it gives mixed reviews and is it necessary as well. I am not going to remove them for now since whats the rush :) Cheers! --Tom 16:19, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
- (Filll asked me to comment-DGG) They are not necessary in order for the books to be listed, they are necessary if notability is to be based on publishing them, because one becomes notable by publishing important books, not any books at all. But in this case there is a special consideration. The books are supplemental reading for courses, & the libraries that hold them colleges & public libraries, not research libraries. If they can be shown to be required in a number of courses at different places, this meets one of the standards for WP:PROF. I do this by looking in Google limited to .edu and checking likely hits. DGG (talk) 14:53, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
- Yes.--Tom 12:51, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
Yes, the review is on a Nature magazine blog site, and is a reprint of an article in Nature magazine itself. Nature magazine is clearly experimenting with blogs, and this sort of blog is quite different than other kinds. They have editorial oversight. And certainly the Nature magazine article that is excerpted here is a suitable source.
About the "American biology teacher" site: Many people who are at academic institutions or are members of a public library have access to these sites, or have personally subscribed to the sponsoring publications and therefore have access to these sites. I provide the links to these because they are convenient for our readers. This means they will not have to do google searches etc for them. If I find free versions, I post links to those sites. My personal view is that more information is better than less information. If a person's access is restricted through workplace or government censorship, or restriction of access because of membership requirements or registration requirements that the person does not want to meet, then they have slightly less access to the information. But it is still better than if the links were not present at all, IMHO.--Filll 16:52, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Personal background section
Do we have any of this material? Birthplace, schooling, family, DOB, ethnicity, yadda, yadda, yadda? Anyways, lots of other good material so far! --Tom 12:53, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
- I can get all this stuff, but I decided to concentrate on her professional activities. You think all this other stuff is relevant?--Filll 13:25, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
- She is not notable as a research scientist. The number (& citations) of her papers is trivial, even counting the ones which have not yet been published and should in fact not be listed unless they have been published by now---this should be checked). In general some bio background is considered relevant if it can be obtained and the basics are included in all bios in available. To the extent that notability depends on being a popularizer or activist they are all the more important.-- but they are never actually essential.
