Talk:Solomon H. Snyder

message: I think that this article could have more reliable sources incorporated into it. Also, there should be a box below the picture giving brief information about his life and career. This article could also use more structure, like adding a education and career section. There is other information about him and his life that could be added to this article. Cduke15 (talk) 14:20, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment

message: I think that the article's opening paragraph could contain a bit more information about Snyder- maybe highlights of his education, where he worked, as well as any important accomplishments and awards. I also think its important to elaborate a bit more about Snyder's general role within his field: what made him special? Why should we bother reading the rest of the article?
I think that having a picture of Snyder is a good idea. I would maybe consider adding an info box along with the image, containing specific details about Snyder and his life (important dates, education, skills, influences, interests, etc.).
I would also suggest splitting up your bibliography into specific sections in order to make the article more accessible. Maybe have an "early life" section containing information about his parents, high school education, as well as a "personal life" section containing information about his extra-curricular interests and family. You could also have an "education section"
With regards to the awards section, I think that having the awards presented as a list is a very good idea because it makes the information easy to find and read.
I would also recommend that you cite your information.
Rschwa99 (talk) 21:02, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Critique

message: Information on Solomon Snyder's childhood 
More information on his wife 
Snyder's primary interest in Psychiatry 
More information on the work that earned Snyder the Lasker Award
Information about his time specifically at Johns Hopkins
His strong/lasting interest in guitar
<ref>
--Cduke15 (talk) 04:56, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Potential Bibliography 

message: First of all, I think the lead section in the beginning is very short and only gives broad information. This section should give more details and specific information about Snyder's life such as his educational background, where he worked and conducted his research, any major contributions he made to the field, any major publications that he wrote, and any significant awards that he won. In this section it says that he made advances in the field of molecular neuroscience but it didn't mention any of the individual advances that he actually made. Also, for the biography section I think this could be broken into several different headers that talks about certain aspects of his life. Possible make an individual section for his early life, career, personal life, major works and contributions that he contributed to the field, and awards that he won. By breaking the biography section into several different, more specific sections, you will be able to give more in-depth information on his life and what he did that made him famous. Also I think it would be a good idea to put a tab on the side of the article that just gives general dates and information about Snyder such as his his birthday, where he was born, where he lives, etc. Also it would be good to have more citations and further readings to give the article more credibility.  Cstauch1 (talk) 21:18, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible Improvements to the Article 

message: Hi guys!
A couple suggestions for improvement: 
* You could add more information to the "Early Life" section. 
* I think you could move the "Family" section to the top of the big "Biography" section. You could also combine this section with the "Early Life" sections and possibly rename the section to "Personal Life."
* It would be interesting to add information about Candace Pert. 
Overall, the page is coming together nicely. Great job! Ahong11 (talk) 18:45, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer Review 

message: Hi guys,
Nice work with editing. A few ways to move the article forward are:
* Create a new section titled "Career", and separate out into early, Johns Hopkins, and late career sub-sections.
* Having both a "Sources" and "References" section is confusing. I think the "Sources" section should be titled "Further readings" and be moved below "References".
* Move the information box to the lead section, and recode the picture to be inside it.
* Move information from the "Awards" section to a new "Career" section. Also, try to add more information about the work that made him well-known.
Good job! Jdeales1 (talk) 03:10, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another Peer Review 

message: Hi!!!
Great job so far!!  A few suggestions...
Instead of having everything under "biography" have the facts about his personal live there and separate out the rest
Flesh out his education, career and research
If you can, put together his info box and picture, and add another picture
Awesome job!!
LRoskes (talk) 15:18, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer Review 

message: Good job so far, but I think the article is still pretty short. I think it would be good if you combined the early life and family sections into one, and added more information about his early education as well as undergraduate and medical education. Also I think adding some info about his work with Candice Pert on the opioid receptor would help to give the article more substance since that is one of his greatest contributions. I really liked your awards section. It is very clear and shows just how accomplished he was. Good luck! Cstauch1 (talk) 17:55, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer Review 

message: Hi!
There are a few instances in this article where the beginning of a sentence ends a paragraph and the end of that same sentence is the first line of the next paragraph (see "education and early career" section). This article is pretty short, so if you could add more information, especially about his time at Johns Hopkins, that would be great. Aflynn2 (talk) 18:14, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer Review 

message: I think that the article could use some reorganization in the early life and family sections. Maybe combine the two, label it "personal life" so there aren't two small sections. Apatera517 (talk) 16:28, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer Review 

message: Considering the fact that this article started from scratch, I think overall it is pretty good but still a little too short. The best section is the awards section. It is thorough and organized. I think the one main objective would be to add more information  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shackstanwick (talk • contribs) 16:19, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Peer Review

message: I think that this article is good structurally. It does seem that it is a little light on the info. Maybe discussing one of his research projects in detail would be good. I really like the text box and think this article has a great start! It should not take too much effort to finish it up. Good luck! Rserafi2 (talk) 13:49, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer Review 

message: Looks good! I would make sure to merge the picture into the info box and to maybe use a better picture of him. Also a legacy section and maybe a controversy section would be a good addition. I would also expand his career sections specifically about his time at Hopkins.
Sdoman1 (talk) 21:50, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Peer Review

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Solomon H. Snyder. 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/20150225230735/http://www.fnih.org/about/foundation/board/solomon-h-snyder-md-vice-chairman-science to http://www.fnih.org/about/foundation/board/solomon-h-snyder-md-vice-chairman-science
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150225230735/http://www.fnih.org/about/foundation/board/solomon-h-snyder-md-vice-chairman-science to http://www.fnih.org/about/foundation/board/solomon-h-snyder-md-vice-chairman-science
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) 07:26, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hi, his Google Scholar profile is not correct. From the 20 most-cited articles as of today, at least two are co-authored by a physicist dealing with quarks, Scott Stuart Snyder, not by Solomon H Snyder: ,. Therefore I deleted the sentence stating that he is the most-cited researcher according to h-index.Biologos (talk) 10:59, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a good catch, thanks. Would it be useful to look at his citation status within the field of neuroscience? --Tryptofish (talk) 22:43, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  I don't know how to do this. I think it would be best look at the Web of Science data. Maybe they also offer an h-index ranking? Web of Science is not freely available, but maybe it's possible via some Wikipedia grant?Biologos (talk) 09:15, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I looked at our page on h-index, and at h-index#Comparing results across fields and career levels, there is a description of this source: , which is the original paper about the index, and it reports that Snyder (and it is specifically him) had the top h-index in the biological and biomedical sciences from 1983–2002. I think it is fine to state it that way, using that source, and I'm going to put it on the page. Please check if I have done it correctly. Thanks. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:02, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Good idea! I had a look at the list Hirsch used in his 2005 h-index paper, and according to this list Snyder was not the most-cited biomedical researcher then, but the third-most cited researcher with 63000 citations, after Bert Vogelstein with 106000 citations and Salavador Moncada with 69000. Snyder did have the highest h-index, though. I will try to amend this overleaf. Please correct, if necessary.Biologos (talk) 09:33, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Good, we agree. It certainly is ironic that someone can have the highest h-index without having the most citations. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:25, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Most cited researcher