Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biography

Organization and stylistic changes

After answering a question at the help desk, I was left pondering about this guideline and engaged in a quest of organization and stylistic changes to improve the page. It was to improve the form, visuals, style, navigation, organization. I did not intend any meaning changes and if there is any it was likely unintended. I hope the changes are of the liking of my fellow editors. If not, feel free to discuss or change. Sincerely, Thinker78 (talk) 06:58, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Unimportant age details at time of death

When is it useful or encyclopedic to say something like "he died seven and a half weeks before his 93rd birthday" instead of "he died at age 92"? I might be convinced to allow something like "she died one day before her 100th birthday", but where do we draw the line? Chris the speller ^yack 18:22, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

@Chris the speller, I see no point in including that sort of content. The age at death should be sufficient. Eddie Blick (talk) 19:13, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

At a minimum, I would expect a reliable source to mention it, establishing some significance.—Bagumba (talk) 19:32, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks to you both for the response. There are hundreds of these, including some like this: "exactly two weeks before his 95th birthday". What precision! But what good does it do for any reader? I will nibble away at this pile of excessive drivel. Chris the speller ^yack 20:41, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

@Chris the speller, a related point is that in many cases where such expressions appear the date of birth is unsourced. Therefore any expression of a span before or after a birthday would be unsourced, also (unless the span is stated in the obituary or has some other reliable source). Eddie Blick (talk) 00:43, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

While I agree that a line should be drawn, if the detail is reliably sourced, I don't see how it benefits the reader to provide a less precise range rather than a more precise one. The fact that such references commonly occur in reporting suggests that it is a detail likely to be of interest to readers, and I would generally be opposed to any sweeping campaign of removing these details, absent a lack of sourcing. BD2412 T 23:25, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

If the specific date of death is provided, can't the reader determine for themself how much of a "partial year" of age they had at the time of their death? I don't really see any need to include something extraneous like that, especially when it's already there for anyone who actually is interested. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 00:22, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

I find such details to be excessive, with the damage being distraction and undue weight. Birthday anniversaries just aren't (usually) that important. It is appropriate in some nonencyclopedic writing that is trying to add some color to the story, but Wikipedia should stick to plain facts. I think some editors would even reject this as analysis of the sources (assuming the sources just give the birth and death dates). Bryan Henderson (giraffedata) (talk) 03:14, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Since 99.7% of our dear departed did not die on their birthday, for uniformity we should either specify the proximity to their birthday or omit it. If everybody gets the birthday mention, who's going to pitch in and add it to the hundreds of thousands of articles that don't yet have it? Easier to remove it from the relatively few articles where the subject's niece or nephew added this unencyclopedic trivia. Chris the speller ^yack 04:16, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

I am sure that newspapers have some rule for this. It is very common for news reports to indicate this proximity where it is close (within a few weeks). Taken to the opposite extreme, why do we say of someone, "he died at age 92" rather than "he died in his 90s"? BD2412 T 04:43, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

In my first post at the top of this discussion, I asked "where do we draw the line?" To me, "until his death three months before his 56th birthday" is only slightly less preposterous than "until his death ten months before his 56th birthday". Chris the speller ^yack 05:15, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

where do we draw the line": YMMV. Depending on where and when, some are satisfied if it's verifiable (or even via WP:CALC), others may get into whether it's WP:DUE. Ultimately, there's the WP:ONUS policy:

While information must be verifiable for inclusion in an article, not all verifiable information must be included. Consensus may determine that certain information does not improve an article.

—Bagumba (talk) 05:34, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Saying that someone died weeks before their birthday is more informative to the reader than merely stating their age. Within two weeks is probably a reasonable cutoff, unless we are talking about some milestone (100th birthday, for example), perhaps for which celebratory plans were already in the works (see, e.g., Betty White#Betty White: A Celebration (2022)). BD2412 T 20:53, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

I think if a reliable source deems it important enough to mention, so should we. GiantSnowman 21:00, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

I agree with BD, we certainly do not need any campaign to remove all such mentions. We are writing for the facts, yes, but that does not mean we should strive to make this place completely devoid of colour (anyone else still running Vector 2022?) We are not robots, but if anyone wants a rule, then yes, it seems silly to mention a birthday if it was more than a month out, and removing that seems fine to me. Beyond that, personally I wouldn’t add such detail without it being closer than a week on either side, but to remove it is more of a waste of time than many, many other things you could be doing instead. — HTGS (talk) 22:38, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Consensus on adding disabilities (blind/deaf) in biographical article first sentence?

Disabilities are almost never mentioned in first sentences, just nationality and occupation. See Category:Deaf actors for examples. However this article (Kaylee Hottle) seems to be breaking established status quo. 🅶🅰🅼🅾🆆🅴🅱🅱🅴🅳 (talk) 12:47, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

• The first sentence should highlight attributes that the subject is most notable for. Which attributes should be mentioned is very subject specific. Sometimes an attribute is crucial to a person’s notability (ie the person is notable because of that attribute), while the same attribute may be trivial to the notability of another person. Blueboar (talk) 13:25, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

Does WP:SELFID come into play at all? How does the subject of the article consider themselves? An actress who is deaf, or a deaf actress? soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 13:33, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

Not for the opening sentence. That should be based on independent sources. Blueboar (talk) 13:51, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

When it is central to the subject's notability, it should be mentioned. When not, not. An example where it is central and mentioned is Chieko Asakawa. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:02, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

I gotta be honest, in both of the articles mentioned above I would make sure the disability is in the lead, and maybe the second sentence, but I wouldn’t put it in the first sentence as they are. Most people should be regarded for their work first, then their disability. The fact that they are deaf or blind is not the primary reason these people are notable, but it has clearly had a strong impact. — HTGS (talk) 06:33, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

"Serving/serves/served as"

I have been active in creating and editing business biographies here for many years. For a few weeks now I have been replacing phrasings such as "John Doe serves as the CEO of XYZ Inc", with "John Doe is the CEO of XYZ Inc". The latter is more concise, and I think clearer and more neutral. The edit summary I have typically given is "copyedit, more neutral language". None of my edits have been reverted. On my talk page, User_talk:Edwardx#"serving_as"_non-neutral?, Anastrophe has asked "can you point me to the policy or discussion where it was determined that "serving as" is non-neutral language?".

MOS:OPENPARABIO reads "The first sentence should usually state ... One, or possibly more, noteworthy positions, activities, or roles that the person is mainly known for, avoiding subjective or contentious terms." I think that "serves as" is subjective and contentious. Private sector companies, PR and the business press encourage us to (at least subconciously) see some sort of equivalence between private sector business roles and what might traditionally have been called "public service".

For business biographies this seems clear-cut. But what about politicians, armed forces personnel, roles in not-for-profit organisations, and unpaid roles? I think that we should consider removing "serving/serves/served as" from all articles, and would much appreciate hearing the views of other editors. Edwardx (talk) 19:19, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for starting this, Edwardx. I'll repeat my question/arguments from Edwardx's talk page here, for further clarity. First largely responds to the question of use for military, politicians, etc.

"[...] I'm still unclear in what way describing someone as serving a particular position or role is non-neutral - it doesn't sympathize with nor disparage the subject in any way that I can discern. Politicians and military personnel work within the broader scope of what is commonly and accurately characterized as "public service". With the exception of extremely minor public service, such as serving on a small town's city council, where the members only fill that role part-time and earn a living elsewhere, those in public service aren't expected to work for free. Being paid doesn't change what their role is."

And reply to the contention that the biz press encourages its use so that we subconsciously see an equivalence with public service:

"But is that the case? I hate to throw out the original research argument, but that's what this appears to be. Absent a concrete policy stating that the terminology is overtly violating WP:NEUTRAL, rather than an individual editor's notion about what the term might mean, I think you should bring the matter up in the appropriate place for broader discussion, rather than imposing this as a blanket change. I'm unable to find any reliable sources that support your opinion on this. I've seen 'serving as' used to describe a "low level" customer service representative position - that's why it's described as "customer service".

Look forward to other perspectives as well. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 20:09, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

I would prefer to see this sort of phrasing only for unpaid roles that one might actually consider as service rather than employment. Or maybe for someone serving in the armed forces; that's also commonly called service. But not for just a job, CEO or otherwise. "Served as" has the connotation that to hold this position is a service to society, and (in cases where it is just a job rather than obviously being a service) we should avoid that. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:40, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

I broadly agree with Edwardx's edits, though there may well be cases where "serves" is appropriate. However, I disagree with the edit summary. I don't think it is a matter of neutrality. I would use an edit summary along the lines of "plain English". The text being removed is often just verbiage, and not the great writing we aspire to. If a link was desired for plain English, there is the essay Wikipedia:Use plain English. Nurg (talk) 00:12, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

We also need to consider narrative flow. It is utterly tedious to read an article where every sentence is "Smith was this, and then Smith was that, and after that Smith was the other thing". Phrases like "served as" break up the tedium, which is sometimes necessary for readability. BD2412 T 00:53, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

This is dubious... repetitive prose usually derives from syntax problems, in which case the solution is not to start substituting synonyms. See WP:ELEVAR.

"serves as" is usually not the simplest and most direct way of solving the sentence. Popcornfud (talk) 01:20, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

It is bog-standard terminology, however. See, e.g., William Francis Rocheleau, Great American Industries: Manufactures (1900), p. 8: "The stick served as a lever, and the stone as a weight". No lofty subjective praise is read into that. It is more descriptive than "was". BD2412 T 17:39, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Sure, it's an extremely commonplace construction, it's just usually not the simplest one.

Your "stick served as a lever" example is actually a different usage of "to serve" — it means in the sense of using something to achieve another purpose, like a field serving as a parking lot. Joe Biden is not serving as the US president in the same sense. Popcornfud (talk) 18:17, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

I don't see how False Title applies to this at all, as it has nothing to do with adding or substituting synonyms; it actually argues against excessive brevity. Wikipedia, just as the False Title essay points out, is, unlike newspapers, not constrained for space. Good/great writing is not only about writing in the simplest, most terse, manner.

I've found some past discussions here on WP about the matter, but nothing outside of WP that suggests there's something nefarious or dissembling or puffery-ish about use of serving as/serves as/served as etc.

The past discussions:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Archive_221#%22Serving_as%22_in_lede_of_politics_articles

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Marcia_Fudge/Archive_1#How_should_we_word_the_lead_sentence?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Words_to_watch/Archive_7

The last one there has the most discussion, and while I only skimmed through it, the sense seemed to be that it's not problematic per se, and certainly not harmful, but could be but isn't strictly puffery/PoV.

In my personal opinion which holds zero weight, it strikes me as over-policing of speech. Also of no weight at all but interesting, from etymonline, '[...] Sense of "be useful, be beneficial, be suitable for a purpose or function" is from early 14c.; that of "take the place or meet the needs of, be equal to the task" is from late 14c. [...]" - all of which seems to be its use in this context.

Amusingly, in its earliest usage in the late 12th century, it had the connotation of 'be a slave'. Quite the opposite of puffery! Fortunately, this is not the 12th century.

When people have asked me in the past what I do for a living, I can recall saying, for example, 'well, in one aspect of my job I served as [...], but I also served as [...]" when describing my job functions within a company, since in many of my jobs I wore multiple hats. Perhaps though I was overcompensating for a lack of self-esteem.

My sense - in terms of WP and non-rigid standards/practices - is that we should just do as we do with date formatting, BC/BCE, and other things - if it's one way in an article, leave it that way, if it's the other way, leave it that way. I don't think it needs wholesale replacement. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 19:17, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

My bad — I linked to the wrong essay entirely. WP:ELEVAR is what I was thinking of. Sorry for the confusion. Popcornfud (talk) 19:47, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Nice essay. Just an essay, though, and one that provides no counterpoint to the problem of repetitive monotony, which makes it harder to actually maintain focus while reading a text. This is not an all-or-nothing proposition, there can be a middle ground, and there are definitely circumstances where "served as" is more informative to the reader than merely "was". A person can hold an office in name only and do nothing in it, and it can accurately be said that the person "was" whatever the title of the office was, but not that they "served as" the holder of that office. BD2412 T 20:49, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Apart from elegant variation, we there is also avoidance of close paraphrasing, the need to phrase things differently to the source. (I agree that "served" is usually better than "was".) Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:42, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

I'll just add the relevant essay here, since to my surprise it hasn't been mentioned yet. WP:AREYOUBEINGSERVED Popcornfud (talk) 08:13, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

I see that @Edwardx: continues to purge the terms "serves", "served" etc from articles, but with no rationale, just 'copyedit'. I repeat my objections - however mild - to this, as there's no policy or guideline or even reliable source that I can find that states that those terms are bad/wrong/inappropriate/manipulative/disembling/deceitful/nefarious/must be purged from Wikipedia.

I, and probably most people, wouldn't get the impression that Jamie Dimon is a public servant if his bio noted that he 'serves as the chairman and chief executive officer (CEO) of JPMorgan Chase'. I see no difference between "serves as", "acts as", "works as". It means filling a role and doing a job. It's plain english.

It doesn't praise or denigrate to say "X served as regional manager" rather than "X was regional manager", or even "X acted as regional manager". WP:ELEVAR suggests avoidance of excessive use of variable wording, particularly where it introduces confusion. I don't think it argues that variety in terminology is to be avoided at all costs.

As I suggested before, if an editor runs across an existing article and it uses 'is/was' or 'serves/served' etc., leave it as you found it, as both are reasonable. Absent some guidance that these words are problematic, I think that's a fair compromise.

As there's no clear consensus above, perhaps someone can link to any reliable sources outside WP that argues that there's something inherently problematic with the terms. I can't find any. The terms are used broadly in business, politics, academia, research, activism, and more. We shouldn't be making up language rules based on whims. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 21:36, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. Edwardx please stop making this change. It is the equivalent of changing “till” to “until”; both forms are acceptable, and you have better ways to spend your time than policing the way people use English. — HTGS (talk) 22:54, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

While I don't necessarily disagree with the edit on one level (per my comment earlier), I have only made such an edit myself as part of a larger and more significant edit (as far as I recall). In the context of the copy editing that can be done, it is quite a minor issue. To address the last sentence of Edwardx's post, I don't think there should be a campaign to remove the wording from all articles. I suggest to Edwardx that they focus rather on more worthwhile edits. Nurg (talk) 23:36, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

I just did a random spotcheck of some of Edwardx's "copyedit" edits. All three of the edits I reviewed ([1], [2], [3]) look like improvements to me and good examples of where simple "be" verbs do the job better than "serve". Popcornfud (talk) 08:21, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks to everyone for their varied and interesting thoughts, and especially to anastrophe for uncovering some earlier pertinent discussions. Stepping outside of Wikipedia for a wider view (and we should be seeking to mirror what is written in reliable secondary sources anyway), I have been looking at how obituaries in the leading reliable sources and profiles in Britannica.com, Biography.com, Forbes.com, Simple Wikipedia, etc. None of them use "serves/served as" to describe for-profit CEO/chairman/director roles. For political and military people, they generally avoid it in the opening sentence, and often in the entire first paragraph. We should be seeking to emulate the best secondary sources. The nuances of language matter, especially in the lead, which is all that most of our readers bother with. Using "serves/served as" can be seen as a value judgement, it is needlessly verbose and we should prefer plain English.

My (reconsidered) view is that we should not use "serves/served as" to describe any for-profit CEO/chairman/director roles, and we should avoid it in the first paragraph of any biography. Edwardx (talk) 11:45, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

I see that the removal of "serves/served" etc continues apace, now eliminating it even from military service. I am compiling some information regarding this matter which I'll post later. I still await any reliable sources that state that 'served/serving' etc biased/subjective/a value judgement/to be avoided. I am only going through Britannica.com thus far, and the claim that 'none of them use serves/served as to describe for-profit CEO/chairman/director roles' is not reproducible.

When the difference between "verbose" and "plain" is a matter three letters, I think we're in trouble of reducing WP to a very low literacy threshold. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 20:32, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Collapsed below is a list of biography entries from brittanica.com. I've done my best to randomly poke around through different disciplines but it's obviously not comprehensive; in fact, the list is short, because I've spent way too much time finessing the formatting to wikitext; that's also why I haven't bothered with visiting the other online encyclopedias, I've put more than enough work into this as it is. I prefer to make decisions based on information, not speculation or personal observations in a vacuum.

I have excluded any person whose notability is primarily in public service – politicians, military leaders – or where the only use of 'serves/served/serving/' etc. is in regard public service outside of their primary notability. If I had included its use in public service bios, I'd estimate the list would be half-again larger.

The split between 'public service' and 'not public service' is not black & white at times, and I'm open to striking any for which a compelling argument against inclusion is tendered. I would note, however, that in earlier discussion the split was on formal public service, i.e. political/government/military service, which seemed less of an issue in discussion. Working for a publicly-funded organization, or one that receives some level of government funding, doesn't explicitly mean it's "public service", imo.

I've restricted findings to occurrences in the first or second graf; only the latter is noted when it occurs. Editor Edwardx is not confining the removal to the first or second graf, I would note – all instances are seemingly being removed, but I haven't reviewed every single edit; if I'm mistaken, apologies.

The only elisions are when the use is in the first sentence, as it would mean including birthdate/place etc.

I could discern no obvious inclination or reluctance on Brittanica in using the term. Brittanica seems to have no issue with its use in business bios. I acknowledge my own confirmation bias in this, as I hope others would of their own findings. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 17:55, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Click at right to show/hide ___

André Lwoff – French biologist (2nd): "He spent most of his research career at the Pasteur Institute in Paris, serving on the board of directors from 1966 to 1972. From 1959 to 1968 he was also a professor of microbiology at the Sorbonne in Paris. When he retired from the Pasteur Institute in 1968, he served as director of the Cancer Research Institute at nearby Villejuif until 1972." Andrew Dickson White – American educator and diplomat (2nd): "After graduating from Yale in 1853, White studied in Europe for the next three years, serving also as attaché at the U.S. legation(sic) at St. Petersburg, Russia, in 1854–55." (grey area) Anna Wintour – British editor (2nd): "Wintour was the daughter of Charles Vere Wintour, who twice served as editor of London's Evening Standard newspaper." "After working as a fashion editor for a series of New York magazines, she served as editor (1986) of British Vogue and as editor (1987) of House & Garden, which she controversially relaunched in the United States as HG." Azim Premji – Indian businessman: "[...] Indian business entrepreneur who served as chairman of Wipro Limited, guiding the company through four decades of diversification and growth to emerge as a world leader in the software industry." Barry Diller – American media executive: "American media executive who served as CEO of numerous companies, most notably Twentieth Century-Fox (1984–92), where he created the Fox Network, and IAC/InterActiveCorp (2003–10), an Internet venture." Beno Gutenberg – American seismologist (2nd): "Gutenberg served as a professor of geophysics and director of the seismological laboratory at the California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, from 1930 to 1957, when he retired." Carlo Rubbia – Italian physicist: "In 1988 he left Harvard, and from 1989 to 1994 he served as director general of CERN" Carol Ann Duffy – British poet: "In 2009–19 she served as the first woman poet laureate of Great Britain." Columbus O'D. Iselin – American oceanographer (2nd): "For Harvard he served as assistant curator of oceanography (1929–48) and research oceanographer of the Museum of Comparative Zoology." Craig C. Mello – American geneticist: (indirect usage) "His curiosity was largely influenced by his father, James Mello, a paleontologist who had served as the associate director of the National Museum of Natural History at the Smithsonian Institution in Washington, D.C." (grey area) Denis Diderot – French philosopher: "[...] was a French man of letters and philosopher who, from 1745 to 1772, served as chief editor of the Encyclopédie, one of the principal works of the Age of Enlightenment." Dumas Malone – American historian, editor, author: "He edited the Dictionary of American Biography from 1929 to 1936 and the Political Science Quarterly from 1953 to 1958 and served as director of the Harvard University Press from 1936 to 1943." Ellen Fitz Pendleton – American educator: "American educator who served as president of Wellesley (Massachusetts) College for a quarter of a century." Fenton J. A. Hort – British biblical scholar: "In 1856 he was ordained in the Anglican Church and for 15 years served as a minister near Cambridge." Franz Mehring – German historian and journalist (2nd): "Thereafter, he edited the socialist Leipziger Volkszeitung and served on the staff of the party's official publication, Neue Zeit ("New Age")." Fukui Toshihiko – Japanese economist and banker: "Japanese economist and banker who served as governor of the Bank of Japan (BOJ) from 2003 to 2008." Georges Cuvier – French zoologist (2nd): "After graduation Cuvier served in 1788–95 as a tutor, during which time he wrote original studies of marine invertebrates, particularly the mollusks." Henry Dunster – American minister and educator (2nd): "Dunster was educated at the University of Cambridge (B.A., 1631; M.A., 1634) and then taught school and served as curate of Bury." Hunter S. Thompson – American journalist (2nd): "He served as a sports editor for a base newspaper and continued his journalism career after being discharged in 1957." (this during military service, but, grey area) Ignacy Krasicki – Polish poet (2nd): "He served as one of the closest cultural counselors to King Stanisław II August Poniatowski; in 1795 he was named archbishop of Gniezno." (grey area) Indra Nooyi – American business executive: "Nooyi served as the company's CEO (2006–18) and chairman of the board (2007–19)." Ita Buttrose – Australian journalist, editor, businesswoman: "[...] Australian journalist, editor, and businesswoman who was the founding editor (1972–75) of the highly popular Australian women's magazine Cleo and the first woman to serve as editor in chief (1981–84) of the Daily Telegraph and Sunday Telegraph newspapers in Sydney." Jackie Milburn – British football player: "He retired in 1956 and, after serving briefly as a manager for Ipswich Town (1963–64), became a sports journalist with the Sunday Sun and News of the World." James Manning – American educator: "[...] was a U.S. Baptist clergyman who founded Rhode Island College (renamed Brown University in 1804) and served as its first president." Jerzy Neyman – Polish mathematician and statistician (2nd): "After serving as a lecturer at the Institute of Technology, Kharkov, in Ukraine, from 1917 to 1921, Neyman was appointed statistician of the Institute of Agriculture at Bydgoszcz, Poland." "He served on the staff of University College, London, from 1934 to 1938, and then immigrated to the United States, where he joined the faculty of the University of California, Berkeley, becoming chairman of a new department of statistics in 1955 and residing as a U.S. citizen for the rest of his life." John McPhee – American journalist (2nd): "He served as an associate editor at Time magazine (1957–64) and a staff writer at The New Yorker (from 1965)." John Pond – British astronomer: "Pond was elected a fellow of the Royal Society in 1807 and served from 1811 to 1835 as astronomer royal." (grey area) Lei Jun – Chinese entrepreneur: "[...] Chinese business executive who was a cofounder (2010) of electronics maker Xiaomi Corp.; he also served as chairman and CEO." Lene Hau – Danish scientist: "Hau also took a position at the Rowland Institute in 1991, serving as principal investigator for the Atom Cooling Group until 1999." Lou Gerstner – American businessman: "American businessman best known for the pivotal role he played in revitalizing the ailing IBM in the mid-1990s; he served as CEO of the company from 1993 to 2002." Maria Ramos – Portuguese South African economist and businesswoman: "Portuguese South African economist and businesswoman who served as CEO of the transportation company Transnet (2004–09) and later of the financial group Absa (2009–19)." Marissa Mayer – American software engineer and businesswoman: She later served as CEO and president of Yahoo! Inc. (2012–17). Martin Evans – British scientist (2nd): "In 1978 he joined the faculty at Cambridge, and in 1999 he accepted a post at Cardiff University, where he later became president (2009–12) and served as the school's chancellor (2012–17)." Meg Whitman – American business executive and politician: "[...] American business executive and politician who served as president and CEO of eBay (1998–2008), an online auction company, and later of the technology company Hewlett Packard (2011–15)." "After the latter restructured, she served as CEO of Hewlett Packard Enterprise (2015–18)." Moses Hess – German author and zionist (2nd): Hess saw a material application of his beliefs in an idealistic, somewhat anarchic socialism, and he organized workers' groups while propagating his ideas in the radical newspaper Rheinische Zeitung ("Rhinelander Gazette"), for which he served as Paris correspondent from 1842 to 1843. Myron C. Taylor – American financier and diplomat (2nd): "At the behest of J.P. Morgan he became a director of United States Steel, serving as chairman of its finance committee from 1927 to 1934 and as chairman of the board and chief executive officer from 1932 to 1938." Nora Perry – American journalist and poet: "She served as Boston correspondent for the Chicago Tribune and the Providence Journal for a time while continuing to contribute stories, serials, and poems to various other periodicals." Ohno Taiichi – Japanese businessman (2nd): "He served as assembly shop manager in Toyota's vehicle-making operations, then quickly climbed the corporate ladder as his manufacturing expertise was recognized." Ozzie Guillen – American baseball player, coach, and manager (2nd): "After four years in the minors, Guillen was traded to the White Sox, where he served as the team's starting shortstop for 13 years (1985–97)." Patricia A. Woertz – American business executive: "[...] American businesswoman who served as president and CEO of the agricultural processing corporation Archer Daniels Midland Co. (ADM) from 2006 to 2014." Paul Gervais – French paleontologist and zoologist: "At Montpellier, he served as professor of zoology and comparative anatomy (1845–65) and became dean of the faculty of sciences (1856)." Paul Nurse – British scientist (2nd): "He also held various positions at the Imperial Cancer Research Fund (ICRF; now Cancer Research UK), notably serving as director-general (1996–2002) and chief executive (2002–03)." Ray Stannard Baker – American writer (2nd): "At Wilson's request, Baker served as head of the American Press Bureau at the Paris peace conference (1919), where the two were in close and constant association." Reed Hastings – American entrepreneur: "He served as its CEO (1998–2020) and co-CEO (2020–23) before becoming executive chairman (2023– )." Rex W. Tillerson – American businessman and statesman (2nd): "He later served as the general manager (1989–92) for Exxon's oil and gas production in a region that spanned Arkansas, Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas." Rex Warner – British writer (2nd): "In the 1940s he served as director of the British Institute in Athens." (grey area?) Robert Nardelli – American businessman: "American businessman who served as CEO of Home Depot (2000–07) and Chrysler (2007–09)" Roger Ailes – American television producer and political consultant: "He began a career in television the year that he graduated from Ohio University (B.A., 1962), serving as a property assistant for the Cleveland-based program The Mike Douglas Show."<br "By 1965 he was working as a producer for the show, and in 1967–68 he served as executive producer, receiving an Emmy Award for his […]" (remainder unavailable to non-subscriber; I thank Brittanica for how much they do make available) Rubem Braga – Brazilian journalist (2nd): "For a three-year period (1961–63) he served as Brazilian ambassador in Morocco." (grey) Saad al-Hariri – prime minister of Lebanon (lede begins with 'Lebanese businessman') (2nd): "After receiving a degree in international business from Georgetown University (1992), Washington, D.C., Hariri worked at Saudi Oger, a large Saudi Arabia-based firm owned by his father, where he oversaw construction work and served as a maintenance contractor for the Saudi royal palaces." Shirley M. Tilghman – Canadian molecular biologist: "[...] is a Canadian molecular biologist and the first woman to serve as president of Princeton University (2001–13)." Sir Julian Huxley – British biologist (2nd): "He later became professor of zoology at King's College, London University; served for seven years as secretary to the Zoological Society of London, transforming the zoo at Regent's Park and being actively involved in the development of that at Whipsnade in Bedfordshire; and became a Fellow of the Royal Society." Sir Michael Ernest Sadler – English educator (2nd): "He served as secretary of the Oxford University Extension lectures subcommittee from 1885 to 1895 and as steward of Christ Church, Oxford, from 1886 to 1895." Tom Brokaw – American television journalist and author (2nd): "Brokaw served as NBC's White House correspondent during the Watergate scandal and worked on the floor of the Democratic and Republican national conventions in 1976." "From 1976 to 1982 he served as a host of NBC's popular morning program Today." Ulf von Euler – Swedish physiologist (2nd): "After his graduation from the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, Euler served on the faculty of the institute from 1930 to 1971." Umberto Agnelli – Italian industrialist: "[...] was an Italian automotive executive and grandson of Giovanni Agnelli, the founder of Fiat SpA. He served as the company's chairman from 2003 to 2004." Ursula Burns – American executive: "American business executive who served as CEO (2009–16) and chairman (2010–17) of the international document-management and business-services company Xerox Corporation." "She was the first African American woman to serve as CEO of a Fortune 500 company and the first female to accede to the position of CEO of such a company in succession after another female." W. Averell Harriman – American diplomat (2nd): "The son of the railroad magnate Edward Henry Harriman, he began his employment with the Union Pacific Railroad Company in 1915; he served as chairman of the board in 1932–46." Walter Cronkite – (2nd): "Before returning to the United States, he served as UP bureau chief in Moscow (1946–48)." William Rainey Harper – American educator: "[...] was an American Hebraist who served as leader of the Chautauqua Institution and as the first president of the University of Chicago. William S. Paley – American executive: "He transformed the small radio network into a media empire, serving as president (1928–46), chairman of the board (1946–83), founder chairman (1983–86), acting chairman (1986–87), and chairman (1987–90)."