Talk:Martin Nowak

message: I've removed what appears to be a direct copy of this page, which clearly displays a copyright notice and is not credited as a source. A quick look at the Wayback Machine shows the external webpage existed before the text was added to this article, so it appears that some improper copying has taken place here. The material can be re-added if it is appropriately reworded or fully quoted and given proper attribution. Franamax (talk) 18:48, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: This material actually came into the article from Nowak's biography on the PED website, which is credited as a source. I strongly suspect thirteen.org (of which I hadn't heard) got it from Martin's CV.  Although formulaicly the Harvard CV asserts copyright this is definitely fair use. NBeale (talk) 05:48, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: NBeale, I am not interested in this article enough to sort it out completely, but it sounds like you are copying verbatim material from some PED site which has also been copied verbatim by thirteen.org.  That suggests your copying is not in violation of the copyrights of thirteen.org.  However, it sounds like your copying is plagiarism in the sense that it does not show by use of quotation marks which passages are verbatim copies of some source.  It could be fair use to quote that much, but you have to put the passages in quotes or it is plagiarism.  (Note/apology:  I could perhaps be a bit off-base here, because I have not traced out where the specific language came from.) doncram (talk) 09:59, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Really this is not a problem. I know Martin well, and I'm quite sure he does not object. But to make people happy I have also done a few tidies. NBeale (talk) 13:09, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Apparent copyright violation 

message: I've put in a reference to this very important paper which has just come out as the cover paper in Nature.  I know and collaborate with Martin, but I do think this is (a) important and (b) NPoV. NBeale (talk) 09:06, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I have included a note and refs to the criticisms of this paper.vHF 152.88.168.51 (talk) 13:04, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  EO Wilson paper 

message: I've added a section on Supercooperators because any book that gets a substantial review in Nature is IMHO notable enough for this. Also Milinski says something quite important about the NTW paper. However I am a friend of Martin's and if people feel this is insufficiently NPOV please amend. There is lots more to be said about Supercooperators and if someone else were to make an article about the book it wouldn't be a bad idea. NBeale (talk) 07:11, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Supercooperators 

message: Do we really need so many names in the "list of doctoral students" section, especially when most of these people are not really notable scientists (yet) with their own Wikipedia entries? I would propose deleting most names except those who are notable enough to have their own Wikipedia entries.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashujo (talk • contribs) 18:11, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of doctoral students 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Martin Nowak. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070123171823/http://www.templeton.org/about_us/who_we_are/board_of_advisors/ to http://www.templeton.org/about_us/who_we_are/board_of_advisors/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:48, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Martin Nowak. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061211093716/http://www.ped.fas.harvard.edu/people/faculty/ to http://www.ped.fas.harvard.edu/people/faculty/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080516005403/http://www.ped.fas.harvard.edu/news/PSPaward_2006.pdf to http://www.ped.fas.harvard.edu/news/PSPaward_2006.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061209165413/http://www.ped.fas.harvard.edu/people/faculty/index.html to http://www.ped.fas.harvard.edu/people/faculty/index.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:19, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Martin Nowak is on leave because of previous contacts with Jeffrey Epstein, according to the Harvard Crimson. It's too early for edits and the story will likely evolve in the next few weeks, but we should keep an eye out for it.--Raxu360 (talk) 17:51, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  On leave from Harvard 

message: *IMO article lead includes career discipline information well developed in the article body with apparently appropriate citations.
*However article lead sentences omit citations possibly leading casual readers to form Wikipedia:BLPRS concerns.
*I suggest repeating citations within the article lead improves the article's credibility.
*Does Wikipedia policy or other consensus apply in such a case?
Conrad T. Pino (talk) 09:52, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead Paragraph Citations 

message: I have made some edits to get this article in a better state and plan to continue working on it. However, examining the article's history, I have noticed that over the past few months, a series of anonymous IPs have gradually removed content relating to the disciplinary actions against Nowak due to his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. This is a WP:NPOV violation as these events were extensively covered in reliable sources. I will restore this content. Astaire (talk) 09:37, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: It's pretty absurd that all of it was removed. I've added it back in from a previous version. Gumshoe2 (talk) 13:11, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of Epstein content