Talk:Michael Terman
| 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 Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
needs work[edit]
Someone who understands all of this guy's work should probably rewrite this and cite every publication he's ever made. I added a link to one study [1] Dream Focus 00:17, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
citing every publication is not appropriate here[edit]
Many scientists have hundreds of publications. An encyclopedia is supposed to selectively cite publications to highlight what's most important. Saenger (talk) 20:54, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
- You are right, that is not our practice. Normally we list all the books,and the most important 4 or 5 published papers of the individual. generally as judged by citation counts for objectivity. But when we discuss the most important ones in the text itself when discussing their research, there may be no need for a separate list. We rarely include book chapters, conference papers, etc., unless particularly important. I am puzzled at the articles in the selected publications list here, which looks rather like a few trivial articles have been chosen, none of them in core journals of the discipline--I have removed them, as I should have done earlier. DGG ( talk ) 00:36, 16 April 2012 (UTC)