Talk:Subir Chowdhury

Discussion

I'm new to wikipedia so please bare with me here. I'm a big fan of Subir Chowdhury and his work and would like to fix all the errors and issues with his article. Can you suggest a "good" bio page to base my edits/updates on to ensure this is done to the Wikipedia standards?

Reliable Sources

Thanks ==

Coupster00 (talk) 16:22, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources describes what a reliable source looks like. BTW, how did you become a "big fan"? Are you a customer or employee of ASI Consulting Group or perhaps even Chowdhury himself? -- DanielPenfield (talk) 00:14, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion. I became of fan of Dr. Chowdhury's by seeing him at speak at a University of Michigan gathering of economics professors in 2010. He spoke with such passion on the topic of quality, economics and improving the world around us. I approached him and he suggested I read his book the Ice Cream Maker, which I did. It had a profound impact on my life. I am not an employee of his company or even a customer, just a grad student trying to learn from a potential mentor. This is why I'm volunteering to help fix his Wiki page. Coupster00 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:13, 15 May 2012 (UTC).

Found a citation for 2003 ASQ koth award

http://asq.org/auto/about/awards-koth-auto.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.242.9.207 (talk) 22:56, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Harvard University "Fellowship"

If this does indeed exist, then why do the searches http://www.google.com/search?q=Subir+Chowdhury+Fellow+site%3Aharvard.edu and http://www.google.com/search?q=Subir+Chowdhury+Fellowship+site%3Aharvard.edu turn up nothing? -- DanielPenfield (talk) 08:03, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

I found formal reference to the fellowship on Chowdhury's website - alongside another one that he set up at LSE. IMHO, it is extremely dangerous for a fellow of his standing (in the business consulting industry) to make a false claim. As extra measure, I called Harvard development office and spoke to Beth Thompson. She confirmed that the Chowdhury fellowship does indeed exist. She said that she'll send me an email to confirm (if necessary). Finally, I noticed that this fellowship is in its first year at Harvard and that Harvard has a standing rule of NOT publishing small fellowships (of which there are literally thousands). TheNewGuy (talk) 03:01, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Post-script - went the extra mile and confirmed the fellowship at London School of Economics (just to be safe) via email to the development office. After I received the word from Ms Thompson, who is the assistant dean for Development Services at Harvard U, she expressed surprise that a Wikipedia editor flagged this fellowship as "in dispute". She questioned how "we" could allow something like this to happen. INDEED! How could we? And frankly speaking, this episode continues to give me great concern.

Just because you find something on Google, DOES NOT MEAN that it is true. But it also works the other way. If you cannot confirm it (either way), the worst you can do is flag it publicly as in dispute. I do not mean to get into anyone's face about this - but in my opinion, this is pretty serious business. Ray Wyman Jr (talk) 17:21, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

General Edits

I agree with previous remarks that the page was HEAVY with hyperbole, very obviously written by a salesman or some other representative. However, I did a fair amount of research and found ample evidence that this guy has good standing and is generally known as a strong contributor in the SixSigma/TQM field. His notability is established. I also saw that clearly he has good relationships and/or partnership(s) with other leaders in this area - e.g., Genichi Taguchi, Marshall Goldsmith, Warren Bennis. I apologize in advance for not "talking" about these changes in advance, however some of the flags (e.g., peacock terms) and the bit about Harvard seemed punitive, given the volume of traffic that this page draws and this guy's credentials. This was my baptism effort - don't expect kudos - but I do expect that many of the changes I have made here will stick. I intend to be vigilant and monitor insider edits, should they ever come. I am now monitoring the talk page - please engage me on any issues that you may have. Thank you. TheNewGuy (talk) 03:11, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Please post proposed edits here before flagging. Quite a lot of work has already gone into this page - don't mind doing more, but I believe it is only fair to ask for specifics before flagging. Thank you. Ray Wyman Jr (talk) 00:35, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

I had requested that editors flag me here for edits. I will add citations and remove the flag when completed. RWyman^t@lk 15:23, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Section Titles

I just wanted to chronicle a debate that I have had with other editors on the use of certain terminology for section titles. In this case, the section titled "History" was "Authorship." I prefer "Writing Career" because I feel it is more descriptive of the intent. The subject is a consultant who has written books; but he has done more than just dabble. In my opinion, "History" is not descriptive enough because this section only deals with the linage of books he has authored. What can we do to make this better? Ray Wyman Jr (talk) 14:53, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

We should start by consolidating a bit on this, IMHO. "Consulting" and "History" do not need to be separated. Also a bit redundant to have a separate award list. Wikieditor 3833 (talk) 02:58, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Deleted "Reviews" and text to comply with NPOV flag; moved acceptable NPOV text to under existing heading "Recognition" MUnderwood 02:23, 18 June 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikieditor 3833 (talk • contribs)

Restored prev sub "Honorary Degrees" as it is a separate CV category. MUnderwood 12:36, 24 October 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikieditor 3833 (talk • contribs)