Talk:David M. Halperin

message: The article should be renamed David M. Halperin, including his middle initial. Would help with disambiguation. Skoojal (talk) 05:15, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: In the absence of objections, I have made this change. Skoojal (talk) 23:32, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Rename article

message: I think this section is very poorly written, and needs to be improved. I dislike the organization of the material, and feel that it needs to be rewritten; furthermore, it seems to reflect only negative and critical viewpoints. Halperin's work has also received positive reviews - could someone please find them and add them here? Viramag (talk) 22:56, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Evaluations of Halperin's work section 

message: An editor has added a lot of material to the article based on Halperin's CV, located on the University of Michigan's website. I've tried to explain to the editor that this is a WP:SPS and therefore not a reliable source for Halperin's accomplishments. I let a lot of it go except when the editor added a slew of journals (in a sea of redlinks) to the article. I don't want to get into an edit war over this, but (1) we can't rely on self-published sources for this sort of material and (2) it's not really all that helpful to list every journal he's supposedly published in. We already have a list of his pubs. If there's something notable about one of the articles he's published, fine, then we can cite it to secondary sources. Finally, the editor's contention (on my Talk page and in edit summaries) that it's not a self-published source because it's on the University website is not credible. Faculty at universities for the most part control their own biographical information, and certainly the CV wasn't prepared by the University.--Bbb23 (talk) 04:11, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Self-published source 

message: I have removed this section. The evidence is flimsy and it feels as if someone has a personal grudge.
NotoriousQRG (talk) 15:24, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: You're going to have to obtain a consensus for removing sourced material (because of a "feeling" you have). You removed other material as well, and the material you added is sourced to a blog and is rather puffy.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:36, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

text: You've done a lot more than that and still without any consensus for your changes. I suggest you stop.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:27, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I want to add something that may be of some help to you. If you look back at the history of this article on this Talk page and at WP:BLPN (you'll have to go into the archives), you'll find that the article has repeatedly been contentious. You'll also note, in case you haven't already, that I was often in favor of removing negative material, including the material you've removed. That said, I'm a big advocate of process, and it's a bit hard to accept your coming out of nowhere and just removing material without any real discussion, given the protracted history. Perhaps you could generate some rediscussion on the specific points here - or even at WP:BLPN - which might achieve your objective in a more deliberate fashion. I also think you should tackle one thing at a time. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:47, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

text: It's not "you", but I've reworded the last sentence and added a cite.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:21, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

text: As I've already said, this material has been discussed before, and you'll have to obtain consensus to remove it.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:21, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

text: You're really just repeating yourself. As I've said, I'm not unsympathetic to your view, but, at the same time, I believe in procedural safeguards, and because of the controversy and discussion over this section in the past, I'm reluctant to simply yank it out. If no one else comments here, you can raise this at WP:BLPN. I might add that the passage of time without apparently any further news on the issue, in my opinion, strengthens your position. BTW, who is this "someone" you spoke to "about these issues"?--Bbb23 (talk) 15:37, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: accusations of plagiarism

message: The heading section defines David M. Halperin as a "theorist in the fields of gender studies, queer theory, critical theory, material culture and visual culture". I think that all these fields pertain to sociology, so I propose to change a little bit the definition: "theorist in the sociology fields of ..... and visual culture".--Auró (talk) 20:03, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Halperin is not a sociologist. The areas mentioned in the lead are not necessarily sociology fields. I think you're adding your own opinion to the lead as to what he is and what he writes about. And if they were sociology fields, the word would be unnecessary.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:56, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I have approached Halperin article because I am interested in his contribution to the homosexuality field, and I am currently reading his work Hundred Years of Homosexuality. If you know what the main field of Halperin is, I would appreciate your opinion, since I think it would improve the definition of his profile. I thought that his approach to homosexuality was mainly sociological, though it could also be considered historical. This was in accordance with the fact that queer theory and critical theory pages exhibit the "Sociology" box.--Auró (talk) 12:18, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the lead is fine the way it is. It describes who he is per his own sites and others.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:03, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: My opinion is that the information that he works with a sociological method would add useful information for those readers, like myself, that are not familiar with the terms queer theory or critical theory. See that the article is included in the category American sociologist stubs. --Auró (talk) 22:14, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  A sociologist 

message: I have removed the material concerning accusations of sexual harassment. The allegation is out of place in a “Career” section. The sources cited amount to mere hearsay, even by strict legal standards. No one has provided the alleged victim’s own words or testimony, who never seems to have made any public statements of any sort. All we have are a third party’s allegations, made in court documents, as to what happened. And many of that party’s other allegations have been directly contradicted by the parties involved. It appears that the court filing is the ultimate source behind all citations; as court documents are officially improper sources in BLP, this material must be removed. Nor can one say one is merely reporting an accusation, since we all know the libelous, prejudicial, and defamatory nature of accusations of sexual harassment. There is a long homophobic tradition of such allegations against gay men. The material is therefore in violation of policies on BLP and must be immediately removed. Antinoos69 (talk) 11:19, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm no expert on this-- is MIT's website a reliable third-party source?  That's wiki's criteria. jj (talk) 14:13, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

text: No. The MIT site--which looks rather strange, btw--is merely quoting The Tech, the school paper, which is merely quoting the court pleading. So all we have is the court pleading on this particular matter, pure hearsay (in this case) and an improper source. Given the inherently prejudicial, defamatory, and inflammatory nature of the mere allegation, and given the intensely homophobic history of such allegations, an allegation simply will not do. It's like praeteritio: I'm not going to tell you what a sexual predator everyone knows you to be. It can't be undone and colors everything else. Wikipedia should not be involved in such disreputable and potentially homophobic practices.Antinoos69 (talk) 08:22, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree completely that mentioning these unproven allegations violates our BLP policies, and support keeping them out of the article. I would apply the same standards to people of any sexual orientation, or unknown sexual orientation, per WP:NPOV. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:57, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Career Section 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on David M. Halperin. 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/20140808053918/https://www.lsa.umich.edu/UMICH/complit/Home/People/Faculty/halperin-cv.pdf to https://www.lsa.umich.edu/UMICH/complit/Home/People/Faculty/halperin-cv.pdf
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) 05:21, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on David M. Halperin. 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/20080718184634/http://apq.anu.edu.au/qas/qas-fullprogram.pdf to http://apq.anu.edu.au/qas/qas-fullprogram.pdf
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) 05:52, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified