Jean-François Gariépy: Revision history

Filter revisionsshowhide

To date:

Tag filter:

Invert selection

External tools:

For any version listed below, click on its date to view it. For more help, see Help:Page history and Help:Edit summary. (cur) = difference from current version, (prev) = difference from preceding version, m = minor edit, → = section edit, ← = automatic edit summary

curprev 22:3822:38, 24 May 2024‎ XeCyranium talk contribs‎ 13,325 bytes −1‎ Formatting undo Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit
curprev 22:3422:34, 24 May 2024‎ XeCyranium talk contribs‎ 13,326 bytes −233‎ →‎Selected works: No real coverage of the book, self-published, doesn't seem notable for inclusion undo Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit

curprev 19:5519:55, 21 May 2024‎ AnomieBOT talk contribs‎ 13,559 bytes +541‎ Rescuing orphaned refs ("auto1" from rev 1215713933) undo
curprev 17:5517:55, 21 May 2024‎ 2a0a:ef40:61c:e901:8975:c961:6e15:fbd2 talk‎ 13,018 bytes −1,824‎ To be honest the rest of the science section can probably go too. Its not notable at all (unrelated to what he is acutally "famous" for, and it probably does violate wikipedia synthesis policies since none of the sources are even about this person specifically, they are just generic sources about researchers who applied for epstein money undo Tag: section blanking
curprev 17:5117:51, 21 May 2024‎ 2a0a:ef40:61c:e901:8975:c961:6e15:fbd2 talk‎ 14,842 bytes −2‎ This person is noteworthy for his political commentary, not for his academic career (which is mostly non-existent). As such, the commentary should go first. There is also no need for the science section to be so long, since this person is completely unnotable as a scientist and would not qualify for a wikipedia article on the grounds of his academic profile undo
curprev 17:4617:46, 21 May 2024‎ 2a0a:ef40:61c:e901:8975:c961:6e15:fbd2 talk‎ 14,844 bytes −2,581‎ →‎Personal life: None of this seems noteworthy or relevant? Also it seems deliberately selected to discredit the person. Its maybe difficult to judge because it probably technically doesnt violate the 'no syhthesis' policy, but it everything here is clearly cherrypicked from his biography to create a negative impression. Its also telling that every one of the sources is on "the other side" of the political spectrum writing to discredit him. But regardless of politics, its simply not relevant Tag: references removed

24 May 2024

21 May 2024