Talk:Simon Reich

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.

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

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.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

source with material for article

This source has a lot of material that needs to be inserted into the article: books where he is co-author, fellowships, assignments, etc. --Enric Naval (talk) 14:04, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Enric Naval, I updated authorship, fellowships, awards, etc last night. The link you inserted is no longer valid, but there are plenty of updated ones on the web that provide the information you listed and were updated in his page last night. A user by the name of Whispering undid my revisions, but I'll be reverting it again soon—just waiting to hear reverted the info. It doesn't violate the good faith claim he submitted, so awaiting his explanation. Globalhumanist (talk) 19:35, 20 August 2017 (UTC)Globalhumanist[reply]

Globalhumanist. It was likely reverted because there are whole paragraphs with no sources, for example under "Awards" section. I advice finding sources or the awards.

Examples of good sources would be official lists of awardees, news items issued by the institutions that granted the award, news items from newspapers belonging to the institution, news items from newspapers, etc.

Sources of low quality would be things written by the awardee himself (because wikipedia prefers sources that are as independent from the author as possible), news items from sources that don't check sources and simply repeat what is told to them, etc. Press releases are usually low quality, unless they are issued by the institution that grants the award. If the awardee writes a list of his awards and it's published by someone else, then it depends. For example this paper published in Kellogs' website is likely to be taken as a good source, as it's unlikely that Kellogs allowed unaccuracies to be published on their own website.

I suggest incorporating in the article, for example: source for Ford, source for Newark, source for Kellog visiting fellow in Fall 1997. --Enric Naval (talk) 10:16, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]