Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
I am pretty disgusted by what in fact happened, which was that people have edit warred to simply remove the tags, and leave the information unverifiable. If there is a reason grounded in policy to prevent a reader from easily verifying these statements, I'd love to hear it. I do not believe such a reason exists and would therefore also love to hear someone explain why they are disrupting an attempt to improve an article. ] (]) 18:53, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
I am pretty disgusted by what in fact happened, which was that people have edit warred to simply remove the tags, and leave the information unverifiable. If there is a reason grounded in policy to prevent a reader from easily verifying these statements, I'd love to hear it. I do not believe such a reason exists and would therefore also love to hear someone explain why they are disrupting an attempt to improve an article. ] (]) 18:53, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
:Please check pages 151–153 of Thompson, the reference given next to those sentences. ] (]) 17:08, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Volcanoes, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of volcanoes, volcanology, igneous petrology, and related subjects on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.VolcanoesWikipedia:WikiProject VolcanoesTemplate:WikiProject VolcanoesWikiProject Volcanoes
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages'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
After realizing that he would likely never receive a permanent post at the Survey, Glicken became depressed and began pulling his hair out...
This sounds slightly suspect and sensationalized. Do people who pull their hair out just suddenly start one day, or is it more likely they tend to do it over a long period of their life? The article mentions other so-called "eccentricities", so it sounds to me like he probably did it before this point, only that it may have become more noticeable or severe. I'm just thinking out loud here but it would nice to have this claim reviewed by a medical expert. Viriditas (talk) 02:48, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
It seems to me odd that an article featured as one of the best should, in several places, refer to the reaction to its subject's eccentricities without better references. Is it possible that the eccentricity that so significantly affected his career was more on the part of the USGS corporate culture? After all, Doctor Glicken was a significant contributor to science in his field. Too Old (talk) 15:31, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
That might be his date of birth, but we prefer a secondary source, such as an obituary. I don't have access to this journal at present, but someone should:
Obituary: Harry Glicken (1958-1991), by R.V. Fischer, Bulletin of Volcanology53, 514-516, 1991.
I noticed a rather controversial statement in this article, stating the the subject of the article was eccentric, disorganised, and had "behavioral oddities". A core policy of Misplaced Pages is that all material in articles should be verifiable. I could not verify this information because it did not have an inline citation, so I added tags to indicate that a citation was needed. My expectation was that someone who knew where the material had come from would simply add a citation tag to the end of the appropriate sentences.
I am pretty disgusted by what in fact happened, which was that people have edit warred to simply remove the tags, and leave the information unverifiable. If there is a reason grounded in policy to prevent a reader from easily verifying these statements, I'd love to hear it. I do not believe such a reason exists and would therefore also love to hear someone explain why they are disrupting an attempt to improve an article. 128.40.9.164 (talk) 18:53, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
