Talk:Henry L. Roediger III

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Henry L. Roediger III article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Psychology Mid‑importance

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Biography: Science and Academia

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group.

Should this be a stub article?

I feel like this article is long enough to warrant its stub status to be removed. Does that seem reasonable? also, how do I go about doing that? Daronsen (talk) 01:45, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Page issues

The page has been tagged as relying on primary sources and as being on a subject of questionable notability. Roediger definitely meets the wikipedia criteria for notability of academics. As for the primary sources, it is true that Roediger is an author on a number of the references, but this is because the text is referring directly to the results of his research. Even still, these studies have been peer reviewed and published. Other than his research, I have referenced his Vitae, though I feel that this is permissible given that this document comes from the Washington University websiteDaronsen (talk) 09:45, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that all the claimed awards are referenced only to his CV, which is not an independent source. The claims on which notability are built need to be from reliable independent sources, which means not the subject, his employer or any organisation in which he plays a non-trivial role. Some other things (blogs and wikis) are also out, but they're not a problem here. Stuartyeates (talk) 09:50, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok that seems fair. I've replaced most of the CV sources with independent sources. I'm still looking for a couple of sources for some of the things in his CV, but even if we ignore those I feel that his notability has been established. The section on Elections, Honours and Awards shows he has made a significant impact on his feild (awarded Institute for Scientific Information Psychologist with highest impact), he has received a number of prestegious awards (Guggenheim Fellowship), he has been elected as a member of a selective society (AAAS, APA, APS, CPA), his work has made a significant impact (again, the award of Psychologist with highest impact), he holds a named chair (James S. McDonnell Distinguished University Professor of Psychology), he has held a highest-level elected or appointed academic post at a major academic institution (president of the APS), and he has been the head or chief editor of a major well-established academic journal (Psychonomic Bulletin and Review and the Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition). And so, he clearly meets criteria 1,2,3,4,5,6,8, and maybe 7.

Also, I agree that some of the language used was making unsupported attributions, but I have removed this. Daronsen (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 01:52, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't heard back from you so I will assume you agree and I will remove the issue tags Daronsen (talk)

Eyewitness testimony

I disagree that Roediger rose to prominence for his work on the reliability of eyewitness testimony. Is there a particular reference that you were referring to? Daronsen (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:03, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Remember the basics

Look at this edit.

Page ranges, like 10–17, and things like Deese–Roeder–McDermott, require an en-dash, not a hyphen.

One does not capitalize an initial letter merely because it's in a section heading.

This is really basic stuff, found in WP:MOS. Michael Hardy (talk) 15:19, 23 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Ambassador Program course assignment

This article is the subject of an educational assignment at Victoria University of Wellington supported by WikiProject Psychology and the Wikipedia Ambassador Program during the 2012 Q1 term. Further details are available on the course page.

The above message was substituted from {{WAP assignment}} by PrimeBOT (talk) on 16:26, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]