Talk:David P. Weber

A fact from David P. Weber appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 2 March 2013 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that months after whistleblower David Weber reported concerns about ethics violations by SEC Inspector General David Kotz, Weber was terminated for unrelated reasons?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2013/March. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/David P. Weber.

Wikipedia

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.

Biography: Politics and Government

	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 politics and government work group.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

It is requested that an image or photograph of David P. Weber be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

DYK nomination

On March 2, 2013, DYK. I did not make this nomination. Geraldshields11 (talk) 14:35, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Copy Edit and issues

Dear Fellow Editors, IP editors are removing and changing text. This text is supported by the references following the text. Geraldshields11 (talk) 14:31, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Possible close paraphrasing

I ran this article through Earwig's copyvio detector, which gave back several sources with wording very close to this article. Here are some of the articles:

I believe this article needs to be checked for close paraphrasing of these sources. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 13:42, 7 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I just ran Earwig's copyvio detector and you must have done a good edit job to reduce the similarity because I got this. also, which way was the coping. Geraldshields11 (talk) 00:34, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.uticaod.com/latestnews/x1674229145/UC-grad-now-with-SEC-to-speak-at-college 41.50% http://www.foxbusiness.com/industries/2012/11/27/sec-staffers-took-laptops-with-critical-market-info-to-hacker-conference/#ixzz2bWTsIhUb 40.10% http://onlinemba.umd.edu/resources/faculty/david-weber/ 33.80% http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-11-16/business/chi-nyse-hires-former-homeland-security-chief-20121116_1_general-jon-rymer-black-hat-convention-sec-staffers 33.30% http://www.umuc.edu/business/about/faculty.cfm 29.10% http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/05/david-kotz-conflict-of-interest_n_1944205.html 27.50% http://www.cic.edu/Programs-and-Services/Programs/Woodrow-Wilson-Visiting-Fellows/Pages/David-P.-Weber.aspx 22.50% http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-10-09/sec-watchdog-cites-report-as-proof-he-s-not-a-security-threat.html 17.40% http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-11-16/sec-sued-mf-global-jpmorgan-suspended-compliance.html 14.50% http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/25/us-sec-watchdog-idUSBRE90O10120130125 14.50% http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/federal_government/sec-settles-whistleblower-case-with-580000/2013/06/11/89a66fde-d2cf-11e2-a73e-826d299ff459_story.html 13.80% http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/10/david-weber-sec_n_1508161.html 13.80% http://www.whistleblowers.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1557&Itemid=102 10.70% http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-25/sec-said-to-back-hire-of-u-s-capitol-police-inspector-general.html 9.10% http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/04/us-sec-consultants-idUSBRE9030V320130104 9.10% http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/15/davir-weber-lawsuit_n_2140452.html 9.10% http://mobile.reuters.com/article/businessNews/idUSBRE9030V320130104 9.10% http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-10/sec-pays-580-000-over-ex-investigator-s-firing-claims.html 8.30% http://www.rhsmith.umd.edu/faculty-research/academic-departments/accounting-information-assurance/faculty/faculty-list/adjunct 8.30% http://newenglandinhouse.com/2013/09/02/sec-settles-with-whistleblower-employee-for-580k/ 6.50% http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/sec-rocked-by-lurid-sex-and-corruption-lawsuit-20121119 5.70% http://insurancenewsnet.com/innarticle/2012/11/26/secs-schapiro-resigns-after-whistleblower-suit--a-365129.html?lifehealth 5.70% http://www.whistleblowersblog.org/2015/08/articles/news/senators-honor-whistleblowers-at-first-congressional-celebration-of-national-whistleblower-day/ 4.80% http://m.yahoo.com/w/legobpengine/news/sex-corruption-rampant-us-securities-exchange-commission-080639318.html?.b=world&.ts=1353399868&.intl=IN&.lang=en-in&.ysid=v97LAJXTEVPPa9D6_4R9Mkz8 4.80% http://www.senseoncents.com/2014/07/whistleblower-appreciation-day-my-top-5/ 3.80% http://www.law360.com/securities/articles/448631/sec-settles-ex-official-s-wrongful-termination-suit- 3.80% http://www.businessownersnetworking.com/Julie_Goodwin_Weber.html 3.80% http://www.oge.gov/Laws-and-Regulations/Employee-Standards-of-Conduct/Employee-Standards-of-Conduct/ 2.90% http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/921557/000115752311007107/a50100954ex10_1.htm 2.00% http://www.thestar.com.my/Business/Business-News/2013/07/18/Watchdog-Finds-SEC-Did-Not-Properly-Vet-Contractors.aspx 2.00% http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/matt-taibbi-lurid-sex-and-corruption-scandal-sec 1.00% http://www.dcbar.org/find_a_member/results.cfm 1.00% http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financial-crime/9260405/Top-SEC-investigator-David-Weber-put-on-leave-over-gun-comments.html 1.00% http://www.40actblog.com/2012/12/sec-general-counsel-to-resign-from-the-sec.html 1.00% http://ntst.umd.edu/soc/ 1.00% https://ntst.umd.edu/soc/ 1.00% http://www.md.ngb.army.mil/absolutenm/templates/?a=756&z=41 1.00% http://goodwinweberlaw.com/attorneys/david-p-weber/ 0.00% http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323949904578536001278977258.html 0.00% http://www.sec-oig.gov/Reports/Semiannual/2012/OIG_SAR_Spring2012.pdf 0.00% http://lawyers.justia.com/lawyer/david-paul-weber-1253685 0.00% http://www.courts.state.md.us/cgi-bin/cstf.pl?inputname=weber&firstname=david&submit=Submit 0.00% http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-01-19/sec-inspector-general-kotz-quits-for-private-investigation-firm.html 0.00% http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-11-09/sec-fires-investigator-who-alleged-ethics-lapses-lawyer-says 0.00% http://www.complianceweek.com/at-the-sec-investigations-about-investigators-who-investigate-other-investigators/article/241463/ 0.00% https://muckrock.s3.amazonaws.com/foia_files/finalSEC12UIHQ0063GC37SI_SEC-OIG_A.pdf.pdf 0.00% http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-05-14/senator-presses-sec-over-decision-to-put-investigator-on-leave 0.00% http://www.americanbanker.com/issues/177_96/jon-rymer-fdic-sec-inspector-general-1049412-1.html 0.00% http://www.sec-oig.gov/Reports/OOI/2012/OIG-557.pdf 0.00% http://mddf.maryland.gov/index.aspx 0.00% https://www.facebook.com/pages/70th-Regiment-LDR-Regional-Training-Institute/324433367578062 0.00% https://www.linkedin.com/pub/david-p-weber/73/9b1/60 0.00% http://mddf.maryland.gov/blogpost.aspx?id=24 0.00% http://www.academicapparel.com/caps/cum-laude.html 0.00% http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cum%20laude 0.00% http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/cum-laude.html 0.00% http://www.thesaurus.com/browse/subsequently 0.00% http://www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/subsequently 0.00% http://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/subsequently 0.00%

30-40% isn't good. It just means that this article isn't a blatant copy/paste of the content from those other sources. There's still a pretty clear close paraphrasing issue, which isn't so much a problem of copyright but plagiarism. Earwig's Copyvio Tool is a help because it demonstrates that there are blocks of text that are simply cribbed from other sources, and further looking makes it clear that the citations to those sources are inadequate.

And frankly speaking, from a Wikipedia perspective, when the sources from which blocks of text are being cribbed are academic or professional bios published by someone affiliated with the subject, it raises people's hackles around here. In short, we need to ensure that this article is objectively written (this goes to the autobiography warning at the top of the page). —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 20:02, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

Someone tagged a ref from the United States Postal Service (USPS) as "non-primary source needed". In the text, the USPS is a third party to a complaint by Weber between the SEC. I found another third party cite to explain: "The USPS inspector general had been asked in May to conduct the investigation into Kotz, after the SEC determined that it needed an independent investigator to probe allegations of misconduct." per http://www.law360.com/articles/448631/sec-settles-ex-official-s-wrongful-termination-suit

Someone tagged a ref from The Rolling Stone Magazine as "non-primary source needed". In the text, The Rolling Stone Magazine is a third party to a complaint by Weber between the SEC. I found another third party cite to explain: "Matt Taibbi of Rolling Stone Magazine reports that Weber came forward with evidence that the SEC, charged with investigating financial crimes, was negligent in its investigation of these two individuals. at http://www.mintpressnews.com/5-whistleblowers-you-might-not-have-heard-of/167144/

This seems to explain why the Post Office Inspector General and The Rolling Stone Magazine were involved as third parties. Best regards, Geraldshields11 (talk) 23:24, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gerald, the problem with those sources is not that they appear to be first-party sources, but that they're primary sources. See WP:PSTS. The USPS OIG investigatory document, for instance, is just that... an investigation report. Wikipedia strongly prefers secondary sources, especially for potentially controversial claims. Additionally, the Rolling Stone links were not only primary sources, but in fact first-party sources: Rolling Stone is rehosting Weber's civil complaint, and that's the document being linked where the Rolling Stone refs are tagged with "non-primary source needed." A civil complaint is just not enough to support any significant claim in a Wikipedia article because, by definition, the factual claims in a civil complaint are contentious. Secondary sources are strongly preferred. But it looks like you're making progress in fixing this problem. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 14:20, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the encouragement, Mendaliv. I will continue to work on it. Geraldshields11 (talk) 00:49, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on David P. Weber. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120824104357/http://www.sec-oig.gov:80/Reports/Semiannual/2012/OIG_SAR_Spring2012.pdf to http://www.sec-oig.gov/Reports/Semiannual/2012/OIG_SAR_Spring2012.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 13:44, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

U Maryland

I changed wording to match the University of Maryland sources. See https://ccjs.umd.edu/facultyprofile/Weber/David ("lecturer") and https://ccjs.umd.edu/landing/About%20Us ("adjunct faculty"). Not "professor" and "faculty" like for example https://ccjs.umd.edu/facultyprofile/Dugan/Laura; https://ccjs.umd.edu/landing/About%20Us . Text of articles must match sources. E goldstein (talk) 14:55, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Academic ranks in the United States. E goldstein (talk) 15:42, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Weber may teach a class for CCJS, but he is a Smith School faculty member. The University of Maryland has very specific rules for titles, and for those teaching in professional degree programs (ie, Accounting, Law, others that require licensure, the title is professional track faculty. PTK faculty titles in the instructional series are called lecturers. https://pdc-svpaap1.umd.edu/policies/ntt_titles.html. This policy first started in 2015, and can be read about extensively here: https://faculty.umd.edu/appointment/new-titles.html JackinMD (talk) 21:36, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

UMD as source

A person's employer is not considered to be an third party source independent of the subject. Wikipedia:Identifying_and_using_independent_sources#Examples. It is fine for things like education or classes taught or other basic facts (even if it all probably came from the subject himself) but not everything. In this case it is hard to tell what to make of a nomination for an award that can be made by sending an e-mail, http://aaahq.org/FIA/Calls , and just because the employer mentions it that's not enough to repeat it, verbatim, here. If it's an important and notable award then someone will report on the winner. E goldstein (talk) 11:45, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Recent activities / CV items

Wikipedia articles aren't the place for the subject of an article to add material reciting whatever public exposure he has most recently received, or other recent professional events he's been involved in. These is an encyclopedia articles about a notable subject, not his personal curriculum vita. When these kinds of events begin to receive more than passing third party coverage, then they are appropriate for inclusion. (Many of the other events in this article easily qualify.) A professional association's own link to its own podcast isn't an indication that something matters, but rather just that it has happened. It's one podcast, not a "significant development". If it is significant, it will garner coverage; and then a disinterested editor, unaffiliated with the subject, can add it. Oh and by the way, it's not "vandalism" to disagree on points such as this so don't call it that. E goldstein (talk) 17:00, 13 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Over the years this article has been the focus of attention by more than half a dozen "single purpose accounts" (see WP:SPA) whose only interest appears to be editing this article and articles related to the subject. See the contributions of these many editors:

Special:Contributions/Topgman2

Special:Contributions/216.15.36.135

Special:Contributions/69.108.105.151

Special:Contributions/RussianBear2014

Special:Contributions/AnthonyPelicano

Special:Contributions/JackinMD

Special:Contributions/100.36.229.246

Special:Contributions/Samuel_Shaw

Special:Contributions/SamuelShaw2017

It's very unlikely that a bunch of different independent editors would come to Wikipedia, create accounts, come to this one article to edit, and then retire from the encyclopedia forever, as so many of these editors have done. Far more likely it is a series of associates of the subject, or the subject himself, come to edit the page in ways favorable to the subject. This kind of manipulation is forbidden on Wikipedia, and it is probably why the autobiography and conflict of interest notices have remained on the page. Read WP:COI.

I emphasize it's not the function of an encyclopedia article to list every media mention that the subject of an article receives, and these most recent efforts, to add references (in two different places) to Weber's "special relationship" with Madoff looks a whole lot more like self-promotion than an objective, impartial attempt to impart information about the subject. Oh and again it's not "vandalism" when editors disagree so knock that off too. E goldstein (talk) 17:25, 13 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Even though the material seems borderline to me, in the spirit of compromise I have consolidated the citations and moved mention to the part of the article where the teaching relationship with Madoff was already mentioned. The material certainly doesn't belong in the lead, where only the most important and basic features of the article are summarized. E goldstein (talk) 17:30, 13 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely correct. There has been a long-running effort to push the ongoing prominence of this article subject far beyond the main thing for which he is remembered—the SEC whistleblower case. Keep an eye out for sockpuppets on here as well. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 02:35, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Libelous and unsourced materials

An unnamed user 174.66.67.154 persists in trying to add libelous material to this article that is either unsourced or poorly sourced, and thus is a BLP issue or vandalism. It also appears to be an SPA, as the person has made no edits other than to this article. Please refrain from doing so in violation of rules. ~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.83.21.166 (talk) 16:08, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Resignation from the University of Maryland

The circumstances leading up to Weber's resignation are reliably and independently sourced, with at least two of them including comments from Weber and / or his attorney. This information may be unwelcome to the subject of the article (and has been previously removed by anonymous editors), but there is no (sourced) reason to conclude that it is incorrect. The description in the article tracks the sources and does not use inflammatory language - IMHO its inclusion is proper and not in violation of WP:BLP. If others disagree, I suggest that we head straight for WP:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard rather than launch a cycle of reverts. JohnInDC (talk) 12:09, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Two of your citations are the same article (WAMU, republished at inside highered). So its not three sources. And, Weber stated through counsel that he could not respond because university counsel would not let him. This is not well sources and unbalanced reporting. Obviously, if it was true, he would not have been hired by two other universities in the same maryland system. This needs to be on the noticeboard. Even if properly sourced, this is libelous content because none of the three stories are able to present weber's position other than a statement from weber's attorney stating he disagrees with the allegations of the students. The other question, also from instructions on BLP, is whether any of the supposed allegations are even relevant to what Weber is known for, which is not teaching at UMD. 2601:156:8080:3AB0:51AD:7F79:BA81:ED1F (talk) 00:28, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, no. The Higher Ed article refers to the WAMU reporting but is otherwise a new article, adding reporting of its own (obtaining a copy of a message allegedly sent by Weber on the school's learning management system) and new information not in the WAMU article (that Weber was found to have violated the school's nondiscrimination policy in 5 of the 7 reported incidents; and that the Dean of the Business School sent a personal apology to the affected students). If this article is going to describe Weber's teaching history in some detail (as it does) then it is certainly relevant at least to note the circumstances, as reported by these reliable sources, under which he left one of those positions. JohnInDC (talk) 00:43, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I started to prepare a BLP Noticeboard entry but see that it seeks a description of why the material violates BLP. Since I don't believe that it does, I will leave the undertaking to you. Please drop a note here or on my Talk page when you've done that. Thanks. JohnInDC (talk) 00:52, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at the noticeboard talk page and concluded that it would not be inappropriate for me to raise the BLP issue even though I'm the one advocating for inclusion. Here is a link to the report so that you can add your views. WP:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#David_P._Weber. JohnInDC (talk) 02:52, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

COI tag (May 2024)

Weber or someone associated with him has been editing articles related to him based on common edits. These edits include Death of Jeffrey L. Smith. Morbidthoughts (talk) 09:26, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]