Talk:Brian Keating

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

Improving/Upgrading this page[edit]

I'm working on upgrading this page with better citations and adherence to wikipedia standards. I'd like to request that someone review the page and make sure it's good so that the tags can be removed. Svolkow (talk) 21:47, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've created a sandbox version of the article here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Svolkow/sandbox/BrianKeatingDraft

Any edits or feedback appreciated. I'll continue to edit in sections. I work at UCSD and have am learning my way here so that I can edit and update articles. Svolkow (talk) 21:58, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reply 23-JAN-2019[edit]

  Please consult assigning editor  

  • It is recommended that, as a courtesy, you first try asking the editor who assigned the template — in this case 142.167.242.182 — in order to find out from them if it can be removed. Since they placed the template, they are in the best position to know whether or not the issues which caused its placement have been corrected. You may contact them by placing a new message on their talk page. In the event that you do not hear back from them after a reasonable amount of time has passed, please reopen this request by altering the {{request edit}} template's answer parameter to read from |ans=yes to |ans=no. Thank you!
    Regards,  Spintendo  07:05, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I appears that the poster no longer edits, I will review the page. 2001:569:712B:C000:9D59:8FE2:E162:F77F (talk) 07:40, 28 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reply 22-SEP-2019[edit]

  Please mention this professors's unscientific views and involvements at "Prager U". Specially his creationist views.   Regards @Apurvasukant

Article Update Requests[edit]

Hello: I am in a COI relationship with Brian Keating. He has inquired as to some updates that may improve his page. First, I noticed that on December 15th, the section on his book, Losing the Nobel Prize was deleted with no explanation as to why. I'm wondering if that deletion can be reverted? He has also written a second book, and the information is listed below. Could a new section be added called Books?

In 2021, Keating published a second book on the Nobel Prize topic titled “Into the Impossible: Think Like a Nobel Prize Winner.” The book is a collection of interviews with nine laureates who received the Nobel prize in Physics. Interviewees include Adam Riess, Sheldon Glashow, Duncan Haldane, and six others who talk about what they credit as the reasons for being a recipient of the award. [1][2]

Secondly, is it possible to add the following to the Research section of the article?

In 2021, Dr. Keating received $4.6 million from the Simons Foundation to continue development of the Simons Observatory. [3]

Dr. Keating has contributed articles on the subject of cosmology to publications including Scientific American[4] and Wired magazine. [5]

Thank you for your consideration. Any feedback or suggested changes are welcome. Best! LeepKendall (talk) 00:07, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just to note that @LeepKendall: also contacted me on my talk page, see User_talk:Mike_Peel/Archive_71#COI_Edit_Requests_-_Brian_Keating_Article and User_talk:Mike_Peel/Archive_71#Brian_Keating_Article for the discussions. I've also been in off-wiki contact with Brian about this article. These discussions led me to do the rewrite in the last few days, making sure that the article follows Wikipedia policy as much as possible. I do have a minor COI here since I work in the same field as Brian - and I was in the Planck collaboration whose observations contradicted the BICEP2 result - however I don't think that has affected my edits here. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 17:25, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Keating, Brian A. (2021). Into the Impossible. San Diego: Lioncrest Publishing. ISBN 978-1-5445-2349-1.
  2. ^ Robbins, Gary (3 October 2021). "UC San Diego physicist who 'lost' the Nobel Prize tells us what to expect in this year's winners". San Diego Union Tribune. Retrieved 22 December 2021.
  3. ^ Robbins, Gary (17 August 2021). "UC San Diego pulls in record $1.54B behind research tied to COVID-19". San Diego Union Tribune. Retrieved 22 December 2021.
  4. ^ Keating, Brian (4 October 2017). "STORIES BY BRIAN KEATING". Scientific American. Retrieved 22 December 2021.
  5. ^ Keating, Brian (27 May 2018). "There's Nothing Noble about Science's Nobel Prize Gender Gap". Wired. Retrieved 22 December 2021.

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Brian Keating/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Steelkamp (talk · contribs) 13:54, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I will be reviewing this article. I aim to complete my end of the review within the next four days. If you would like to return the favour, I have several good article nominations active right now, which you can find at WP:GAN.

Good article criteria[edit]

Criteria 1[edit]

Well written

  • His father is the mathematician James Ax, and Brian has a brother, Kevin, who is three years older. – This isn't grammatically correct. Steelkamp (talk) 13:54, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is something weird about that first paragraph in the article's body. Why isn't Brian's mother's name mentioned, and why isn't it directly said that she is his mother? Steelkamp (talk) 13:54, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • I haven't managed to find his mother's name. I've clarified that Ax's wife is his mother. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 18:34, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • He has a wife, two daughters, a dog, and a brother-in-law who is a marine. – Who is this referring to? Brian, his father, his step father? Steelkamp (talk) 13:54, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Tweaked. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 17:58, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      Looking at the source, it appears to be Strogatz, not Keating, saying that he has a wife, two daughters and a dog. Have I got that right? Steelkamp (talk) 02:37, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      @Steelkamp: Oops, you're right, removed! Thanks for spotting that! Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 09:17, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • and subsequently he became Jewish, describing himself as a 'practicing devout agnostic'. – There should be more elaboration on this, because this sentence really confuses me. Steelkamp (talk) 13:54, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • It's what the ref says. I'm not too sure how to elaborate on this. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 18:56, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • organised – Should use American spelling instead. Steelkamp (talk) 14:32, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Should use American dates as well: MDY. Steelkamp (talk) 05:32, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      • Reluctantly changed. I'd prefer ymd or dmy, but since it is an American topic... Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 18:14, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
        Believe me, I prefer DMY as well, but MDY is what we have to use for this. Steelkamp (talk) 02:38, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is the NSF career grant the same thing as the National Science Foundation CAREER Awards? If so, it should be linked. Steelkamp (talk) 04:56, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why aren't all the other awards in the infobox? Is it because they are not as important? Steelkamp (talk) 04:56, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oops, I missed that, now added. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 18:26, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • To leave in a red link, the link should be notable enough to become an article one day. I am not convinced that the Ax Center for Experimental Cosmology and the Joan & Irwin Jacobs Program in Astrophysics are notable. Steelkamp (talk) 04:56, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Criteria 2[edit]

Verifiable with no original research

  • Having run Earwig on this, there doesn't appear to be any copyright violations. Steelkamp (talk) 13:54, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • PragerU can be a bit questionable depending on how its used. I'd say its ok as a primary source. Steelkamp (talk) 14:32, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I like that there is a mix between university sources and news/journalism sources. Steelkamp (talk) 14:32, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • The formatting of the references is quite good as well. Steelkamp (talk) 14:32, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is totally beyond the good article criteria: I notice that ref 23 says "For subscribers" in the title. You can put |url-access=subscription in the reference instead. There is also another San Diego Union-Tribune source used which is subscription only, which you could do this for. Steelkamp (talk) 14:32, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • I've just removed "For subscribers" since it doesn't seem to be restricted. I can't spot the other one that is restricted? I try to avoid subscription-only references where possible (and I don't have a subscription!). Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 18:39, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have yet to check any sources to see if they match up with what's said in the article. Steelkamp (talk) 14:32, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Done that now. Very good. Just the two points below this. Steelkamp (talk) 05:32, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I probably just missed it, but where in the sources does it say that Peter Timbie was Keating's PhD supervisor? I looked at the 24 page preview of the thesis that's available to me. Steelkamp (talk) 04:56, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • The source for the NASA Group Achievement Award doesn't actually mention Keating. To avoid falling foul of WP:SYNTH, a different source is needed or the sentence should be removed. Steelkamp (talk) 04:56, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • True, but 'group achievement' awards don't tend to list individuals, which makes this tricky. I've moved it to the 'Research' paragraph and reworded it to avoid synthesis. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 18:44, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      I think that's an acceptable solution. Steelkamp (talk) 02:42, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Criteria 3[edit]

Broad in its coverage

  • I guess we don't know where Brian was born or raised? Steelkamp (talk) 13:54, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • I haven't found a reference that mentions that yet. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 18:53, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • PragerU mentions he holds 2 patents? Should that be in the article? Steelkamp (talk) 14:32, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Criteria 4[edit]

Neutral

Criteria 5[edit]

Stable

Criteria 6[edit]

Illustrated, if possible

  • No issues with the image's copyright status.. Steelkamp (talk) 13:54, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion[edit]

Hi @Steelkamp: Thanks for looking at this! I expect to have time to work through your comments later this week. Just to make sure you've noticed this, see Talk:Brian_Keating#Article_Update_Requests - I've been in contact with Brian while working on this article, so if there are any tricky questions I can ask him directly about them / see whether he knows of additional references mentioning that info that we could use here (although of course, no reference = not included!). Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 14:38, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • That's all from me. I will place the review on hold and await your improvements. Steelkamp (talk) 05:32, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Steelkamp: Many thanks, I've gone through them and tweaked the article, and replied to the points above, how does that look? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 18:57, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      Quite close, just one thing left which I have commented above. Steelkamp (talk) 02:45, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      I will pass it now. Steelkamp (talk) 13:29, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Brian_Keating&oldid=1201002838"