Jump to content

Talk:Valery Fabrikant

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

Jewish

[edit]

If he got the nobel prize, he would be listed as Jewish. Now that he is a bad guy, he is "Russian"? He is from Belarus. Jewish from Belarus. Belarus and Russia are two different countries. I know that many people in north america do not know geography, but this is supposed to be an encyclopedia article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.219.128.198 (talk) 17:13, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why not make it even more precise and tell it what it is, a native Soviet-Russian of Jewish faith, born in what is Belarus today. This cannot be so difficult, can it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:C0:DF13:F500:7CE2:5CDB:FA9:224C (talk) 13:22, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Broken link to Terminal City article

[edit]

This link is currently broken... I don't know whether the condition is temporary or permanent:

--Skyfaller 16:40, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Terminal City ceased publication in October 2005, its webdomain has been registered by someone else, and the article is no longer online. The link has been removed. --Bwiki (talk) 03:16, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The link has been restored, because I was able to find the article on archive.org. DS (talk) 02:06, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alleged misrepresentation of academic credentials

[edit]

The source material for this article, and previous articles on Fabrikant in the Gazette (Montreal), indicate that Fabrikant had lied about his academic pedigree: to wit, he has a doctorate in Physics with a concentration in the area of Mechanics; he has never studied nor had a degree in Mechanical Engineering. He had previously been teaching calculus and statistics courses in the Mechanical Engineering department at Concordia University. He had requested a paid sabbatical in Paris, two years in duration when the department asked him which courses he was going to teach in the academic year of 1992 to 1993; the request for a sabbatical was refused and with no preferred courses requested by Fabrikant himself, the department assigned to him to teach a number of courses which any competent mechanical Engineering professor should know how to teach but which Fabrikant himself was utterly unqualified to teach. He was seen wandering around the swimming pool at his apartment building saying over and over again "they are going to kill me. They are going to kill me." Clearly, Fabrikant was terrified that his charade at Concordia was about to end in the most humiliating way possible, in a way that would totally poison his career for good; so rather than face the music, we went on a killing spree.

Does anybody have access to the date of this article? It won an award. It should be cited here so that added context for his actions could be given.

--A Lizard 03:01, 11 Octomber 2006 GMT -5

That makes perfect sense. Fabrikant doesn't do anything, his "charade" is exposed in front of a few people, Fabrikant does what he did, the supposed charade will be exposed in front of the whole country. Yeah, clearly he was terrified about that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.94.66.57 (talk) 21:49-21:50, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A lizard's 11 Oct 2006 claim that Fabrikant had misrepresented his academic credentials is not supported by anything I have seen. It is in fact contradicted by Morris Wolfe's article Dr. Fabrikant's Solution, which states that, "A team from the Montreal Gazette burrowed into Fabrikant's background in the Soviet Union. They found […] that Fabrikant's academic credentials were substantially as he'd stated them."[1] To be sure, his department did require him to teach two computer design courses they knew he wasn't qualified to teach, the head of department refusing a reassignment on the grounds that everyone in the department should be able to teach such a course[2]. But rather than try to hide his lack of qualifications in that particular subject, he actually complained, in two written communications to the university by mid-August 1992, of having been assigned to teach "two courses […] outside my field of expertise".[3] – Concordia was about to get rid of Fabrikant because of his well-documented abusive behavior and the imminent threat of violence. That was the reason he went on a killing spree; not a fear of having some "charade" exposed. --Bwiki (talk) 03:16, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Fabrikant.jpeg

[edit]

Image:Fabrikant.jpeg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 08:12, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

His Youtube page

[edit]

I tried to give a link to his [Fabrikant's] Youtube page, but Wikipedia won't let me. Why not? It is linked on his website. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.71.232.5 (talk) 14:07, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ELNO says to avoid 2. Any site that misleads the reader by use of factually inaccurate material or unverifiable research. See Reliable sources for explanations of the terms "factually inaccurate material" or "unverifiable research". (End of quote.) Even the inclusion of a link to Fabrikant's own website is very problematic by that standard. For example, this page contains a vicious, wildly implausible smear of murder victim Michael Hogben. A convicted murderer's advocacy of this own cause does not count as a reliable source. At the very least, the link should be at the bottom rather than at the top of the "External links" section. As for his YouTube channel, anybody interested in Fabrikant's own account can click the link to his website – and then follow the further link to those audio files if they wish. Wikipedia is not a soapbox for convicted murderers to protest their innocence and smear their victims and the judicial system. --Bwiki (talk) 03:16, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Agree; this is nothing but self justification.--Parkwells (talk) 20:28, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Academic papers from prison (OR)

[edit]

The material on Fabrikant's filing academic papers from prison is OR, as it appears to rely on an editor doing a search on articles under his name. Sources are supposed to be reliable third parties, not editors' doing original research.--Parkwells (talk) 20:28, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unbalanced

[edit]

Article is unbalanced because it does not include material from university independent investigations nor journalists' accounts which documented long history of disruptive behavior by Fabrikant.--Parkwells (talk) 20:28, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Valery Fabrikant article

[edit]

I don’t know what and how you got awards for, but you clearly didn’t do a very good job on Fabrikant’s article. Here are my remarks.

General remark: editor has to be objective. Is it just a coincidence that all changes made in the article were reduced to deletion of everything which could be possibly understood as something positive about Fabrikant?

What was the point of deleting title of Fabrikant’s scientific article? This is not editor’s research. Your deletion of Fabrikant’s website as self serving reflects only your personal opinion, because website contains trial transcripts, which couldn’t possible be classified as self-serving, numerous other external material which were not written by Fabrikant and in any case, Fabrikant is the only person who is still alive and who knows what exactly happened at Concordia. You may believe or not belive his description, but this is a legitimate and important source which reader should have to be able to make his mind on everything else. This is called objectivity.

There is nothing wrong in including somebody’s independent research. What is wrong though that you included only negative findings of independent investigation. This is one sided. You did not indicate at all that what was written in the media is clearly contradicted by Cowan’s report. You refer to the Gazette Frabrikant file. Here is a quote from the Montreal Gazette file:

“To help him along, Sankar arranged in 1982 for Fabrikant to obtain an honorary title of research assistant professor after Fabrikant complained that no university would hire him because he was only a research assistant.”

And here is relevant quote from Cowan's report: "He was just as much a Research Associate Professor in 1983 as he was in 1989. Suggestions to me by University officers that pre-1985 situation was phony or courtesy rank are unworthy."

Here is quote from Fabrikant file: 

 >He also lied when he said in his resume that his doctorate degree was    
 >in mechanical engineering, which deals with machines and the production  
 >of power. His Russian scholastic records show it was in mechanics,           
 >a different field that is the basis of physics and astronomy.        

 >Osman examined Fabrikant's resumes. He found discrepancies between the      
 >two resumes Fabrikant had submitted since coming to Concordia in 1979.      
 >[...] Russia was more open and the documents were available, so he          
 >asked Fabrikant to obtain them.  [...] Concordia general secretary          
 >Berangere Gaudet wrote Osman in January 1992 demanding he drop his          
 >investigation into Fabrikant's credentials, saying it was unreasonable      
 >and possibly bordering in harassment).


And here is totally contradicting statement from Cowan’s report (page 25):

“In fact, much has since been written about Dr. Fabrikant falsifying elements of various CV's over the years. I have compared them, and the differences are largely explicable, if one examines the differences in academic ranks and degree granting systems between North America and the former USSR. Thus his "upgrading" of his USSR academic ranks and subsuming of "Mechanical Engineering" within his degrees in Mechanics and Applied Mathematics in post-1983 CV's are not uncommon reinterpretations made by such emigres once they fully understood Canadian equivalences, according to a number of them I consulted.”


Again, quote from Here is quote from Fabrikant file 

 >Without realizing it, the committee had Fabrikant trapped. He was in   
 >danger of being uncovered as a fraud.    He was not a mechanical engineer 
 >as he had claimed. He could not teach advanced courses in the subject in 
 >which he had fraudulently claimed he had a PhD.

Again, contradicting quote From Cowan's Report:

“It is well understood that Dr. Osman wished Dr. Fabrikant to demonstrate a greater topics breadth in teaching before being considered for tenure, but it seems likely that the choice of design was intended to put some extra pressure. A number of engineers have indicated to me that there were better and fairer choices of courses which could have been used to demonstrate adquate breadth.”

Quote from Fabrikant file: 

 >[...] Fabrikant did not have the right or permission to take a
 >sabbatical.

Quote from Cowan's Report (page 25):

“He was, in my view, eligible to be considered for a sabbatical leave.”


I reproduce below numerous quotes from the media on the same subject, namely, reporters claim to have presented account of Cowan’s report, while in fact it is obvious that they haven’t read it. Don’t you think that objective and balanced exposition should alert the reader to numerous inconsistencies in published material? Here we go.

The Gazette, 22.04.94, page A4, J. Kalbfleisch: Fabrikant lied about his academic qualifications. The same quote on 15.05.94, page A3.

27.05.94, C. Adolph, page A2: Fabrikant ... killed four colleagues ... to draw attention to his disputes with the university.

La Presse, 28.05.94, Andre Noel, page A9: "Valery Fabrikant est ce professeur de genie qui a tue quatre collegues sur le campus de l'universite, en aout 1992, pour attirer l'attention sur la fraude dont il se pretendait victime".

It looks like the reporters just translate from English into French being too lazy to do any work of their own.


The Gazette, 31.05.94, C. Adolph, page A1: "Valery Fabrikant remained at Concordia University despite a phony resume and a long history of abusive behavior because of a serious of bureaucratic gaffes and lapses of leadership, an independent investigator has found." << The Gazette, 3.06.94, J. Sheppard, (Canadian Press) page A4: "The report said Fabrikant falsified his academic credentials".

The Gazette, 9.06.94, editorial, page B2: "... administrators ... did not even check out Mr. Fabrikant's misleading curriculum vitae. They even gave him tenure, despite his record of abusing colleagues ..."

As we know, none of this is true.

The Gazette, 9.06.94, J. Kalbfleisch, page A1: "Cowan identified a series of administrative gaffes over several years that allowed Fabrikant ... to stay on at the university despite his disruptive behavior and dubious academic credentials".

The Gazette, 18.06.94, Review, page B1: "... Cowan report identifies administrative mistakes over several years that allowed Fabrikant to stay on at Concordia despite his behavior and questionable academic background".

Don’t you think readers should be made aware of numerous publications which clearly misstated the contents of Cowan’s report?

As you might know, the Rector himself was fired in atmosphere of secrecy. Here are some quotes from the media on this subject.

"Word of Kenniff firing came after two closed sessions of the Board of Governors. The content of the governors' discussions is still secret, but those who attended the meeting said the atmosphere within was heated, raucous and "very strange"."

Here is yet another quote:

The Gazette, 1.06.94, C. Adolph and P. Wells, page A2: Cowan: "I don't know the details of the conflict between Kenniff and board of governors" Should those details be made public? "In this instance, probably not".

Why is the whole thing secret. Doesn’t the public have the right to know? Shouldn’t you have informed the readers about all this?

Here are some other quotations from both Cowan and Arthurs report, which your balance account should mention and have not.


From Cowan's Report:

Page 19: In the spring of 1990, Dr. Fabrikant was refused promotion to the rank of Research Professor despite good external reviews and the positive recommendation of the Department, the Faculty, and the Dean. No reason was given in the file for the refusal, and no one inerviewed can now recall. Fabrikant appealed to the University Appeals Board on June 26, but by early September various parties had concluded that Fabrikant's rights did not extend to the use of UAB, which was the first indication that his parallel rights of recourse were really not parallel to those of the Bargaining unit members. I believe this decision to be wrong.

There is a key misinterpretation which appears to have led the University to making wrong decisions in a number of matters relating to Dr. Fabrikant, and that centers around the counting of time. The University maintained to the end that only Fabrikant's service from 1985 onward counted towards promotion sabbatical and tenure consideration ( he was, of course, not eligible to be considered on sabbatical or tenure until he joined the bargaining unit in 1990). This appears to be wrong interpretation. Dr. Fabrikant became soft funded non-unionized faculty member in 1982. The shift to Actions Structurantes program in 1985 changed the source of the soft funds. but not his rank or status. He was just as much a Research Associate Professor in 1983 as he was in 1989. Suggestions to me by University officers that pre-1985 situation was phony or courtesy rank are unworthy.

Page 23: When Fabrikant later argued that the collective agreement gave him the right to be considered for tenure in 1991-1992, the Vice-Rector Academic paid scant attention, but in fact he was correct.

Page 25: He was, in my view, eligible to be considered for a sabbatical leave. ..................... In fact, much has since been written about Dr. Fabrikant falsifying elements of various CV's over the years. I have compared them, and the differences are largely explicable, if one examines the differences in academic ranks and degree granting systems between North America and the former USSR. Thus his "upgrading" of his USSR academic ranks and subsuming of "Mechanical Engineering" within his degrees in Mechanics and Applied Mathematics in post-1983 CV's are not uncommon reinterpretations made by such emigres once they fully understood Canadian equivalences, according to a number of them I consulted.

Page 26: On April 13, the Internal Grievance Committee inexplicably upheld the University position on Fabrikant's requests to be considered for sabbatical and tenure... On May 25, the Rector, though he had doubts about the correctness of those decisions, confirmed all three.

Page 28: Dr. Osman has also determined that he would get Dr. Fabrikant to teach two design courses among his four course load for the next year. ................... It is well understood that Dr. Osman wished Dr. Fabrikant to demonstrate a greater topics breadth in teaching before being considered for tenure, but it seems likely that the choice of design was intended to put some extra pressure. A number of engineers have indicated to me that there were better and fairer choices of courses which could have been used to demonstrate adquate breadth.

Page 34: It is my view that improper or mistaken decisions on eligibility for promotion, promotion, sabbatical eligibility, date of tenure consideration, counting of service and on how to handle Dr. Fabrikant's research ethics complaints were all related to his behavior.


Arthurs' Report

Page 36: Board referred these [Fabrikant's] allegations to the Rector Dr. Kenniff who, by Memo dated February 19, 1992, asked Vice-Rector (Academic) Dr. Sheinin to investigate these charges. Dr. Sheinin defined her task very narrowly; she conducted her investigation with circumspection so extreme as to be self-defeating. Her report indicates that she read documents "relevant to the contract" which was the subject for allegations - but not apparently the contract itself; she did not speak to several individuals she ought to have spoken to, including people from Transport Canada and in the University's own Office of research services; she failed to search out, or at any rate to obtain, the actual contract and other relevant documents; she did not comprehend the significance of documents she did read; she seems to have either been misled by Prof. S. Sankar or to have misunderstood him; she did not extend her investigation or her report to other conflicts of interest; and she dealt with the issue of authorship by reference to general principles rather than specific facts.

Page 39: Dr. Kenniff wrote to Dr. Fabrikant on May 14, 1992, stating that, on the basis of Dr. Sheinin's second report, "no further action will be taken at this time". When he wrote that letter, in effect, no proper investigation had ever been made of either first or the second set of allegations. Dr. Sheinin ought to have realized that her report might expose herself, Dr. Kenniff, the Board and the University to justifiable criticism. And for his part, Dr. Kenniff ought to have relized that the report he had received from Dr. Sheinin and forwarded to the Board was not based on proper inquiry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hector rod (talk • contribs) 19:43, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Editors are welcome to provide properly sourced additions to articles.--Parkwells (talk) 15:25, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Neither I, nor you are judges of whether Fabrikant's murders were justified or not. This is not purpose of wikipedia. All you have to do is to present facts the way they are, "good, bad and ugly". You presented only "bad and ugly", and this is against policy of wikipedia.--Hector rod (talk) 15:24, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm having some difficulty with the concept of a "justified murder". Still more with a "justified mass murder". It's true that a killing may be judged justified, if self-defence is proved. It would be a great stretch to present Fabrikant's acts as self-defence, given that none of his victims were armed. Laodah 08:01, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Yes, Fabrikant is Jewish, and so were Jesus, Marx, half of Nobel laureates including Einstein, Bohr, Landau. I am also an emegree from Belarus, I met Fabrikant while a student in Belarus State University. Fabrikant was widely respected by students and colleagues, he left Belarus because of the antisemitism. I do not condone his murders, but the true culprits were the school's administrators; academia is ripe with fraud and harassment. How do you think some so-called researchers manage to produce hundreds of papers? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.201.133.246 (talk) 06:01, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above is obviously Fabrikant, and an interesting look into his mind.

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Valery Fabrikant. 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) 10:08, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Valery_Fabrikant&oldid=1249465937"