Talk:Richard Driehaus

	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
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Illinois Low‑importance

	Illinois portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Illinois, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Illinois 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.IllinoisWikipedia:WikiProject IllinoisTemplate:WikiProject IllinoisWikiProject Illinois articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Chicago Mid‑importance

	Chicago portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles or pages related to Chicago or the Chicago metropolitan area.ChicagoWikipedia:WikiProject ChicagoTemplate:WikiProject ChicagoChicago articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

More cut/paste

From [1]^{[dead link‍]}

Any earlier editor able to comment on the point of this unsigned, untraceable link? LeProf 50.179.245.225 (talk) 16:49, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 07:37, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Problems With This Entry

This article seems biased. Here are some examples:

"...and (he) is truly a multi-faceted individual. He has enjoyed enormous business success, earning a reputation within the investment management industry as an investor extraordinaire. " "...Mr. Driehaus’ support of the arts is based on his belief that..."

Should this be talking about his "beliefs"? Shouldn't this focus on the facts?

This seems to be written from the point of view of a biased party.

It also does not seem to conform to wikipedia formatting standards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jrw1234 (talk • contribs) 21:47, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's actually hilarious how biased this article is. It seems to be copied at least in part from the text of a website for something called the Driehaus Museum (http://www.driehausmuseum.org/about/view/richard). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jrw1234 (talk • contribs) 22:16, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're quite right. It's laughably biased, spammy and is copypasted from Driehaus's own website. The IP used for most of these edits is identified as belonging to Driehaus' own company. I've reverted to what I think is the last good version, issued warnings, and have put a watch on this page. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 03:20, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Small matter

The Prize content, here, needn't list so may recent recipients; rather, the section head should refer to the Prize article, and only very limited (recent, very notable) "such as" recipients should appear in this article. LePRof — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.179.245.225 (talk) 15:43, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Initial referencing work

A first-pass was performed to move referencing from its sandbox stature (bullet-point interspersions of URLs, bare URLs, etc.) to the beginnings of a more usual usual open bracket-ref-close bracket format. Tags were added at the head and in-line to indicate areas where immediate attention is needed. Note, some references that appear in further reading may be suitable for inline use, but this requires opening each link to verify information—the job of the original contributor, and not easily/wisely performed as a forensic task. If the foregoing editing makes the article seem that it is unready for public viewing, it seems so because it is so. Attention is needed, and readers should be made aware that it is not currently to standard. LeProf 50.179.245.225 (talk) 17:30, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Larger matter — opposite bias in ignoring subject, and only approaching article redactively?

There is no question regarding the notability of an individual with the professional and philanthropic history that Mr Driehaus presents; moreover, there is no reason to cast a jaded (oppositely biased) eye on the subject of this article. Available appropriate citation-ready information is very largely positive (see below); Driehaus was among the top 50 philanthropists in the US in 2012.

Following is a complete list of all articles appearing on the first 6 pages of a Google search of this subject performed on 16 April 2014, exclusive of "hits" to the various Driehaus organizations; it is supplemented only by the first entry, which was generated by an internal search of the NYT. That is, apart from the opening NYT link, this is a list of all Google-identified independent articles, though it includes institutions offering awards and programs endowed by the subject. (Who better to begin the sourcing of a description of this Univ Notre Dame-sponsored architecture prize than the Notre Dame site?) Note, no negative material has been omitted; on those 6 pages of hit results, none was found. The only organizing of the material has been to separate out links to further collections of links (aggregated content) from individual articles, and then for the individual sources, to group more general, reputable national and international sources nearer the top, and to cluster links to the same prize/award/endowment together toward the end.

These links (citations) are offered as research- and citation-ready published articles--substantive future Wikipedia article content--should other editors wish to contribute original, POV-neutral, material to this article. I would also suggest that the google search "richard driehaus site:nytimes.com" and related searches of high quality sources be performed, for further material, by those serious about improving the quality of this article.

Links to further collections of content links:

Individual article links:

If further attention would be paid to this notable individual by editors not associated with the prizes and organizations he has endowed, there would be no need for subject-affiliated individuals to attend to the content of this series of articles to maintain content minimally accurate in scope and substance--and so less cause for the foregoing, almost entirely conservative/redactive recent efforts on this article, described above in Talk. I understand editor concerns on WP puffery and POV matters, and concur with efforts to control such--but as a starting and not an ending point of editing. LeProf 50.179.245.225 (talk) 16:49, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Corrected ref. [9] authorship in Museum section, noted citations missing from lede/body, and edited most tags...

...to make nature of referencing issues clear. Note, the Kirby Talley, Jr.-authored Nickerson Mansion volume is likely self-published by that author. LeProf 18:14, 16 April 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.179.245.225 (talk)

Review Request

Edit: Couldn't figure out how to make this Review link thing work. Got an error page when clicking on the link to choose a secrion -- review already in place/requested or something. Help please. Perhaps I need an account? Well, I refuse.162.206.141.210 (talk) 19:19, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Whew, been here before on an article (re: April 2014 notes)! This mindset is why I never edit on Wikipedia anymore, but this article was in such sad shape, with misinformation to boot! Anyway, this is why I don't and won't have an account. All the IP edits have been me.

Reviewer, please review the April 2014 problems noted at the top of this page. It's not a "good article" yet, but it certainly is not bad or unsourced.

This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. The specific problem is: limited content and non-/sub-standard referencing. (April 2014)

I think this has been addressed.

This article needs attention from an expert on the subject. (April 2014)

I agree. It needs details on the stock market investing stuff, which is not going to come from me in any detailed account. (Although, I usually see this note on math and science articles and not bios.)

This article may rely excessively on sources too closely associated with the subject, potentially preventing the article from being verifiable and neutral. (April 2014)

It seems that at one time, text was lifted from a personal webpage. Although some of the articles may not be the most "credible" (ie that St. Ignatius newsletter and "articles" not from newspapers), I don't think this statement reflects the quality of the current article.

This article includes a list of references, but its sources remain unclear because it has insufficient inline citations. (April 2014)

This seemed to refer to the book in the Further Reading section. It originally did not list the chapter and page numbers. I have not read this book, but I have previewed it on Amazon and got a feel for it from reviews there. Seems like a credible source that actually does talk about stock market investing styles of several well-known individuals. Nothing is cited from it in the article now, but it does seem to bee good "further reading" on the subject. Also, I intentionally went overboard trying to cite everything at least once. There is a sentence at the beginning of his Philanthropy section that is still unsourced. I can't find it anywhere. Would feel OK if someone wanted to just delete that unsourced statement.

This biographical article needs additional citations for verification. (April 2014)

Redundant.

Thank you so much for your review! Cheers.162.206.141.210 (talk) 19:16, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Obit link

https://www.chicagobusiness.com/obituaries/richard-driehaus-has-died

Photo Wigly Pigly (talk) 21:36, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]