Talk:Ian Shapiro

	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
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group.

Politics

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

It would appear that this page was altered by a user with the pseudonym 'Rosenblu' in 2009, so as to remove an embarrassing, but well documented episode in Professor Shapiro's career (the withdrawal of an award because of allegations, which Shapiro denied, that he had retaliated against striking graduate students). No reason was given for the deletion. 'Rosenblu' (whose choice of handle may, or may not, give some indications as to her or his actual identity) appears to have had no activity on Wikipedia apart from these rather peculiar edits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.164.23.3 (talk) 21:42, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am astounded by the anonymous and tendentious vindictiveness of this person who claims to be contibuting to public knowledge. If Shapiro denies that he retaliated against striking graduate students, why is it your aim to put it out there that he did? What is your evidence? This behavior is cowardly in the extreme, not to mention libellous. It gives Wiki a bad name when a person's biography is the platform for someone's private grievance--a prosecution without the defense. To have integrity, a biographical entry must be the product of only established facts, not someone's view of them. This gives Wiki a bad name and hurts its reputation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ogaki (talk • contribs) 11:25, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from inserting your own POV - as another Wikipedia-user has suggested, this constitutes vandalism. This controversy is a matter of public record and established facts. As the reference makes clear, the Hillman prize was publicly withdrawn from Graetz and Shapiro because of these allegations. This story was widely reported - see also Jennifer Howard's article in the Chronicle of Higher Education - http://chronicle.com/article/Book-Prize-Is-Yanked-From-Yale/19461. The section that you have vandalized explicitly takes no sides on whether Shapiro or his accusers were correct. Instead, it reports both Shapiro's and GESO's public statements, based on information from reputable and widely read news sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.164.115.186 (talk) 14:52, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Reason for removal: Let's stick with facts, not allegations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ogaki (talk • contribs) 13:03, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ogaki - the facts are that this award was revoked because of the widely reported controversy. The paragraph which was removed without stated justification in 2009 met the Wikipedia criteria for inclusion. The awarding of the Hillman prize and its revocation are certainly relevant to Professor Shapiro's career. It built on material from reliable published third party sources (the Yale Daily News article, which is corroborated by the Chronicle of Higher Education article cited above. If the paragraph had claimed that the allegations were correct, your criticisms would have merit, and the paragraph would merit re-writing. It did not do so, merely reporting the controversy over the allegations, which led (as documented by high quality sources) to the Hillman prize being withdrawn. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.164.115.186 (talk) 16:35, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Citations coming shortly

To improve this article according to wikipedia's criteria, I'm currently preparing a set of citations based on third party / secondary source material. Thanks for your patience! These should be ready within a few days. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SocSciHistory (talk • contribs) 20:48, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Better sourcing suggestions

PlotSpoiler has again raised concerns about the sourcing and objectivity on this article. Having checked with other wikipedia editors as well as professional editors and publishers, it seems the consensus elsewhere is that, after the first intensive round of revisions and citations, the article is adequate. So, I am removing the tag. That said, I am setting up this section to allow for concerns about the article to be addressed line by line in a constructive way. If PlotSpoiler, or anyone else, has specific suggestions for improving the sourcing or objectivity of the material, we can work through it together so that we can make this article as strong as possible. I have addressed PlotSpoiler's first suggestion on my own talk page. (I'm new so I'm still figuring out what is supposed to go where). Thank you to any and all with constructive helpful suggestions! Please make them very specific and be polite. SocSciHistory (talk) 15:31, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Working on the wikify suggestion

Hi PlotSpoiler (or other helpful interested persons) do you have suggestions for how to wikify this better? I thought I put in a lot of hyperlinks but if you have ideas for more, that would be great. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SocSciHistory (talk • contribs) 19:43, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Ian Shapiro. 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) 16:07, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]