Talk:Alan Lipman

message: Typo was: "sinpers", changed correctly to "snipers".  Therefore, typo was present, not implausible. Now repaired. Thanks.----Incisive23
Probably better off without the quotes, and with a capitalized first and last name--71.247.246.54 13:56, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I'm not sure exactly where US law stands on the issue, but under Wikipedia policy, it is definitely not valid to describe tv screenshots used to identify the subject of a biographical article as "fair use". See Wikipedia:Fair use#Images, and the counterexamples in the section below it, particularly the similar counterexample 7, and counterexample 8. JPD (talk) 09:58, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Images

message: Hi, 
I made the edit that you referred to regarding Alan Lipman, the psychologist who studies violence. No, I don't think there is only one psychologist in Washington, DC. I put in the "the" because as someone who studies Criminal Psych (and, no, I do not know Mr. Lipman) and who consequently follows his work, I *meant* to say that he is the criminal psychologist in DC who is known for his specific work on the causes of mass homicides--a rather specific area of expertise, for which he is known. This is like saying that Mary Day is the American dancer in Washington, DC known as an expert on neo-classical ballet, that Ulysses Sofia is the American physicist in Washington, DC known as an expert on interstellar dust, or that "Jelly Roll" Morton was the American jazz pianist in Washington, DC known for his expertise in improvisational stomp jazz (ok, that's because I'm listening to "Shreveport Stomp!".
Obviously, that is not how it came out, and as someone who has contributed to many pages (as NinaVia and NinaViaDeux!) including Mr. Lipman's work and cites I am horrified about this. I don't know him, or any of the other people I posted about (although I would like to meet Usain Bolt!) 
Nina  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.55.206.2 (talk) 22:56, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Message for James Watson 

message: Greetings and Salutations,
One of my favourite aspects of Wikipedia is the detailing that some bring to the editing. 
However, it is a true statement that Alan Lipman is the psychologist in WDC known for his expertise on large scale shootings. The fact is that he is one of the principal figures who works against gun violence here in the States. This description would be known to anyone in the States who has had any familiarity with these episodes. As he has been a leading commentator in each of these episodes for at least a decade, and basically has served as a national "voice" on preventing such shootings, the statement that he is the psychologist in DC known for this expertise does appear quite accurate.  That the article did not appear to be saying that he is the only psychologist in WDC seems rather clear, yes? Esp. as it then describes that exact expertise in large scale shootings thru the whole of the article. Tho' I am not a fine-parsing grammarian by trade, they did manage to propel my sorry mind thru Cambridge, and this does appear quite reasonably clear, yes? 
Myself, I often find myself torn between Hugo's "Concision in style, precision in thought, decision in life" and Bertrand Russell's 
"I do not pretend to start with precise questions. I do not think you can start with anything precise. You have to achieve such precision as you can, as one may hope, as you go along."  Here, the fact and the statement that Lipman is the psychologist in WDC known for his expertise on large scale shootings seem rather equivalent--the "the" as neutral as the rest of the article's facts and citations. It seems certainly ambitious but perhaps a bit of "the" conclusory to place a warning that would, however unintentionally, insinuate otherwise. All kindnesses.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.134.40.29 (talk) 19:20, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  The meaning of "the" and so forth... 

message: No idea what you are talking about. I do not know this person or anything that occurred in 2013.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:14F:4502:AE40:45A7:7554:2F3B:1A1 (talk) 07:09, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Article

message: I have reverted that addition once more. Of course there is nothing wrong with mentioning Mr. Lipman's views and statements - in a concise and neutral manner. But the recent additions were a clear violation of WP:WEIGHT, WP:PEACOCK, and WP:NPOV in general. Most of the article's content should be independent information about him, not an excessive listing of every single interview. The in-text analysis of those interviews and quotes also violates WP:OR, unless those conclusions are clearly verified by an independent source. GermanJoe (talk) 01:57, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reversal of non-neutral rewrite