Talk:Jason Pontin

Individuals with a conflict of interest, particularly those representing the subject of the article, are strongly advised not to directly edit the article. See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. You may request corrections or suggest content here on the Talk page for independent editors to review, or contact us if the issue is urgent.

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 C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles

University of Oxford Low‑importance

	University of Oxford portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of Oxford, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the University of Oxford on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.University of OxfordWikipedia:WikiProject University of OxfordTemplate:WikiProject University of OxfordUniversity of Oxford articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Journalism Low‑importance

	Journalism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The following Wikipedia contributor may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.

Jpontin (talk · contribs) / Pontin, Jason This user has contributed to the article.

Text and/or other creative content from this version of Jason Pontin was copied or moved into MIT Technology Review with this edit on November 11, 2016. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

Non-Notable Sources[edit]

There's been a lot of additions of "resume" style updates with no notable reference links. Investments and job titles should only be included when there are high quality 3rd party references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.211.91.159 (talk) 20:19, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The content you removed was sourced. Meatsgains^(talk) 23:31, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It was sourced from PR Newswire and DCVC's own website. The source you just added from the Boston Globe is written by Pontin himself and doesn't include any references to Pontin being a VC or working at Flagship Pioneering.

Better? This is uncontroversial information. Meatsgains^(talk) 23:45, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This one doesn't reference Pontin at all: https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/03/31/magazine/what-us-will-be-like-after-we-conquer-coronavirus/

I can't read the full WSJ link but it doesn't seem to mention him in the available text either.

Its behind a paywall but he's referenced... Meatsgains^(talk) 23:50, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NPOV[edit]

It appears from the history that this page was created as a reference for a rather POV series of articles complaining about Pontin's criticism of de Grey. Is that "controversy" even relevant in an encyclopedic entry on Pontin? Knotnic 16:10, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New York Times column[edit]

Jason Pontin writes: while the person who added the details of my January 28th, 2007 column in The New York Times was clearly irritated by the story, I do not think the column deserves mention on this wiki page. The article wasn't that controversial (at least in the sense that not many people paid it much attention), and it seems odd to single out one story from the thousands that I have written over the years. Would some one without any conflict of interest remove it?

On top of being peeved at being outed, the above commenter is trolling Jason Pontin's social media posts and in general making a pest of himself, demonstrating that his deletion request is just as extension of defacement in other media. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.93.52.24 (talk) 02:07, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:JASON PONTIN.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion[edit]

An image used in this article, "File:JASON PONTIN.jpg", has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 16:37, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have uploaded a new image of Mr. Pontin to the Wikimedia Commons and placed it in the bio box of this article. The new image is covered under a CC BY-SA 2.0 license. Wroush (talk) 15:37, 23 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Folio Magazine awards[edit]

Most of the "recognition" section refers to Folio Magazine awards. Are those notable enough for inclusion? Folio Magazine itself has very little press coverage. John Nagle (talk) 05:14, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Awards from a publication which itself is not notable enough for a WP article are probably not notable enouh for inclusion. - Brianhe (talk) 13:57, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge to MIT Technology Review[edit]

Following de-peacocking after 10 years of the user self-editing, so little actually remains cited and notable the article is not in a good state Deku-shrub (talk) 22:35, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pontin does enough of significance outside of Technology Review. The merge is not a good idea. Jeffery Thomas 00:12, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have deleted the merge notation on the page because given the above note it's clear Deku-shrub has something against Pontin. Jeffery Thomas 15:42, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please focus on the edits not the editor. The merge proposal was legitimate in my opinion and I have restored it. For the record, I have no feelings about Pontin one way or the other. - Brianhe (talk) 17:40, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Seems sufficiently-notable to me to warrant own page, esp. by Jimbo's "notable means verifiable" notion of notability. How to resolve? as this is a messy top-note to the MIT Tech Review page. I vote resolve to not merge. Comments?, or is two against enough? (full disclosure: i've got no skin in this game) Tim bates (talk) 17:58, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Professional arguments over ideas would be inappropriate to include in the Technology Review page but are sufficiently interesting to merit keeping; I found them useful when I was checking his background today. Don't merge for me. 24.5.197.180 (talk) 02:16, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Don't merge - sufficient notability per above arguments. The discussion link at the top of the MIT Technology Review article mistakenly goes to that article's talk page - I'll fix it now. This proposed merge is coming up on six months - seems like a long time. If this was AfD it would be closed as no consensus by now, and the hatnotes removed. Timtempleton (talk) 02:00, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merger makes no sense--As someone who reads MIT Technology Review who just stumbled upon this, I agree that it would be a disservice to both pages to merge them. It would be completely inappropriate, particularly since Jason Pontin is no longer editor of the publication. The current editor is David Rotman. I shall remove the proposal — Preceding unsigned comment added by K-MUS (talk • contribs) 15:39, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]