Talk:Art Robinson

message: Unless someone cares to expand this a bit - list of pubs, why he matters - I'm putting it onto VFD. William M. Connolley 19:39:41, 2005-07-20 (UTC).
: Hmm, well, I seem to have answered my own question... Would still be interesting to know if he has any pubs though.
There are many pubs, and I have added the most important one, which references the others on the topic of protein deamidation.
Hi, there seems to be quite a bit of information about this subject at http://www.independentscientist.com/. Unless there is some objection, I'll upload it. I came here after reading that article. Wikipedia should be enhanced with most or all of that information. Sky 10:41, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have brought the article up to date, but for some reason the references don't display correctly. I'm sure it's my mistake but I don't know what I did wrong. Sky Sky 13:28, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

message: I'm not taking sides here - the information is one sided and not accurate. I know Robinson is disliked by the left, but to rewrite history is not good for Wikipedia.  Scientific data WAS destroyed.  Science is messy and full of egos and the like, but here we have a very twisted story.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.243.106.82 (talk) 02:17, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lawsuit and Pauling 

message: adding one or two, but I have a question: the article says the book was peer-reviewed--is there any data for this--it seems to have been privately published. I've removed "peer-reviewed" DGG (talk) 20:54, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: I have fixed the refs

message: This man appears to be a crank who self-publishes all of his writings and created a dubious research "institute" to promulgate a political agenda. Why does the article not either clearly state this or at least clarify his bona fides? As is, it is unclear why he is article-worthy in the first place. The article does not explain what "deamidation" is, let alone why the publication about it is significant. Most glaring omission: He's running for Congress now. 76.118.229.114 (talk) 05:16, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: For any of you new here, the basic Wikipedia policy for whether a subject is worthy of an article is WP:N, which is actually a collection of policies applicable in different circumstances.  In terms of that policy, it doesn't really matter if the person is a crank or not, it just matters how often they're discussed in secondary, reliable sources, etc. Of course, just because an article can be written about someone doesn't mean you can say just anything, some other important policies are WP:BLP and WP:RS. I'm pretty sure that Mr. Robinson would meet the inclusion (WP:N) requirements (barely, simply being a candidate for office is generally not sufficient, but other factors would apply, most particularly external coverage of the Robinson-Pauling lawsuits). but there are potentially controversial statements in the article that need more reliable secondary sources, the article still needs quite a bit of work in its present form. If you believe that this article (or any other) doesn't meet the notability requirements (and can't), then you can nominate it for deletion, you can find information on that process here: WP:AFD  --j⚛e deckertalk 05:19, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Basic Info and Basic Standards 

message: I suspect that there is a better (less ambiguous) way to write whatever is attempting to be said here.  Is ABR the oldest author?  The first?  The most credentialed?  Does anyone here know and have a source for what's actually being said here? --j⚛e deckertalk 16:06, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "senior author" of the Oregon Petition 

message: The re-edits and bias in this section is unconscionable.  The section claims to source Robinson's campaign site, yet the words were then twisted and made the candidates positions seem different than they truly are.  It quotes a very old New York Times poll, yet each time I attempt to put up information from the more current CTA/Wilson Research poll, it is deleted. Are we attempting to be objective here, or would we just like to present a  semantically and informatively one sided view? --User:Octopusoctariantalk 21:00, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The NY Times page cites a CTA/Wilson poll from October 4-5 as input to their statistical model (as well as a Grove Insight poll from October 11-12). This is the very same poll that you are referring to. So how's this poll more current than (a statistical model partly based on) itself? — Eru·tuon 05:12, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  2010 Congressional race in Oregon 

message: Section = 109 BLP articles labelled "Climate Change Deniers" all at once. This article was placed in a "climate change deniers" category. After discussion on WP:BLPN and WP:CFD the category was deleted. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 17:17, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: BLP noticeboard

message: Have attempted to cleanup and de-POV the article adding from new story in Bloomberg. Many of the sources used are less than reliable, being right wing or at least conservative ( The Washington Times,  The New American, The American Spectator, Newsmax), and the "Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine" website is used as a source for that "institute". --BoogaLouie (talk) 18:27, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  recent edits 

message: Info is incomplete; did his kids graduate, or not?
Also, OSU states they cannot comment without the permission of the students involved. Presumably, they would give it in a case like this. Is/was OSU stalling, or do they disagree with their father, or what is going on? 2A00:23C7:E284:CF00:DDE3:FCC4:32E4:64D3 (talk) 18:38, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: OSU

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Arthur B. Robinson. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kevin-grandia/the-30000-global-warming_b_243092.html?view=print
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:33, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Arthur B. Robinson. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kevin-grandia/the-30000-global-warming_b_243092.html?view=print
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120815184757/http://www.kval.com:80/news/local/117619993.html to http://www.kval.com/news/local/117619993.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:52, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified