Jump to content

Talk:Dale K. Van Kley

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dale K. Van Kley. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:11, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No legitimate sources after 7 years

[edit]

Dale K. Van Kley currently gives the appearance of being a non-notable figure. Through the past seven years, not an iota of evidence has been offered to show that anyone outside his circle took any notice of him - everything in the article is either without a source or comes from his colleagues and friends. Just now I deleted a sentence that wasn't even about Van Kley, but someone else. (It's possible that an editor intended that sentence to be about Van Kley's work, but if so, they quit before they got around to mentioning that.)

I don't want to believe that he's non-notable, so please find independent third-party sources in which the reporters have chosen to write articles about him (other than interviews and announcements). TooManyFingers (talk) 08:51, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Dale_K._Van_Kley&oldid=1247208035"