Talk:Robert Zimmer

message: There is a statement in a student newspaper account, which is based on "campus sources" cited in a blog () that Robert Zimmer is dating a particular University of Chicago professor. Is this statement relevant to a biography article? Evidently Zimmer is separated from his wife but whom he is dating doesn't appear relevant to me except possibly to disparage Zimmer and the professor, contrary to WP:BLP. A particular IP editor, apparently using several different IP addresses, insists on keeping this statement in this article, despite the objections of two other editors. --EPadmirateur (talk) 02:05, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  RfC: Is it relevant or notable to state whom a college president is dating? 

message: Why the ancient photo?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.135.100.102 (talk) 21:51, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. --EPadmirateur (talk) 21:31, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Outdated Photo 

message: In collaboration with a few colleagues at the University of Chicago, I have produced a draft of an expanded article on Robert Zimmer. We have made a good-faith effort to ensure that the article is written in a neutral tone of voice and supported by reliable secondary sources. As I have a conflict of interest, I will not implement any changes directly, but would greatly appreciate the assistance of other editors in reviewing the draft and implementing as much of it as possible. Please don't hesitate to contact me through my user page with questions or concerns. Fallentomato (talk) 15:54, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I have revised the draft based on helpful feedback from EPadmirateur. Fallentomato (talk) 23:30, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Excellent work. It was a pleasure to read through the expanded article, especially the mathematics section. With the additional WP links, I think most mathematically inclined readers can follow Zimmer's work. --EPadmirateur (talk) 21:18, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expanding the article from a stub 

message: Being co-author of co-author of co-author of someone is not notable whoever the person is. More so because in this case the person is the academic head of a well respected university and hence automatically passes criteria 6 of WP:PROF. There is no need to puff up this already well sourced bio with a completely off topic sentence which simply adds nothing of value. Solomon7968 12:57, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: For the benefit of others, this is in response to Solomon removing a sentence about Zimmer's Erdős number (3) from the article, and then reverting first myself and then EPadmirateur when we added it back. Solomon, your rationale has changed over time. First it was since you felt the claim needed more independent sourcing and "shouldn't be sourced to a database". I reverted since it was sourced to the AMS/MathSciNet's website calculator of collaboration distance between mathematicians, which feels independent enough. I think now you are removing it since you feel the the Erdős number is just not important enough (encyclopedic) to include. I'm happy to go either way on that - I don't feel that in Zimmer's subfield the Erdős number is particularly meaningful, but I also respect the argument (by the way articulated in WP's Erdős number article) that it is an interesting enough proxy (I would say heuristic) for overall connectedness and collaboration in mathematics more broadly. Maybe the best on that is to get the perspective of a wider range of editors? (Solomon also mentions above and in the revert edit summaries that an Erdős number of 3 is not needed in terms of establishing notability for the purposes of whether to keep this article, which I would agree with but I don't think is a relevant argument insofar as deciding whether it is an interesting fact to include in WP's article.) Since I am over a decade out of academic mathematics, I now retire from the field on this. Martinp (talk) 16:25, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: There should be an indication that Prof. Zimmer himself highly regards this connection, which gets reflected in independent sources (like say a newspaper interview) only then this material gets into. How can we say that Prof. Zimmer doesn't get offended (or at least insulted) by this addition? Solomon7968 16:57, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Solomon, thanks for your reply. I think you misunderstand the interplay between WP's inclusion criteria (for content within articles, not of articles themselves) and sourcing policy. Material should be included if it is "encyclopedic", i.e. relevant, important, interesting. And it needs to be verifiable, which is where sourcing comes in. But the first criterion is dependent on the collective (i.e. consensus) editorial decision of WP editors. There is no need for the subject of an article to feel a fact is important, and for that to be verifiable, to merit inclusion. So: I'm on the fence whether Z's Erdos number is encyclopedic enough (which is why I'm hoping for input from more editors!). But I think your sourcing concerns are misplaced. Martinp (talk) 14:17, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trivia 

message: I would like to request adding a section two sentences and a quote that outlines Zimmer's support of free expression—a similar acknowledgment of Zimmer stance on freedom of speech is acknowledged in the Chicago principles Wikipedia entry. Because this is a large addition to the entry which I believe should be reviewed, I will not implement this addition due to a conflict of interest. The updates are factual and represented without bias, and I welcome your edits.
Add as the third fourth paragraph under "University of Chicago presidency," or as a seperate subtopic titled "Academic Free Expression":
:Zimmer is a prominent voice for the importance of free expression, open discourse, and intellectual challenge on college and university campuses. He charged the faculty committee that wrote the Chicago principles on free expression,  In 2014 he formed the Committee on Freedom of Expression whose report came to be known as the Chicago principles — a set of guidelines intended to demonstrate The University of Chicago’s commitment to freedom of speech. The Chicago Principles are  now adopted by more than 65 colleges and universities.
:As Zimmer noted in a 2017 an address to the Chicago Humanities Festival in 2017,  “The confrontation of new and different ideas, understanding the power and limitations of an argument, comfort with questioning others and oneself, recognition of one’s own assumptions as well as those of others, perceiving the power of context, understanding the inevitability of complexity and the need in many cases to leave behind the temptation of simplicity, exposure and grappling with unfamiliar modes of inquiry, synthesizing different perspectives, and being able to articulately advocate a position—all these are skills that students should acquire through their education, that faculty need to impart in delivering that education, and that faculty and students need for developing original research. This the work of faculty and students to confront new and different ideas through education and research "only happens at the highest level in an environment of rigor, questioning, and free and open discourse.”
:Zimmer also spoke on the importance of these ideas in the keynote address at the Vienna conference on academic freedom,   University of Vienna's Academic Freedom in the Digital Age conference, which welcomed Central European University to Vienna after it was forced to leave Hungary.
StickerMug (talk) 13:59, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with these points and would add that it would be good to add the reference to the keynote address that you mention . Otherwise the additions are fine in my view. EPadmirateur (talk) 15:23, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for your feedback. Do you think that "Stance on Free Expression" should become its own topic header, rather than placed within the presidency section?  StickerMug (talk) 18 December 2019  —Preceding undated comment added 21:59, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updates to University of Chicago presidency 

message: * It is not known what is meant by the phrase "he charged the faculty committee". Please elaborate.
* It would be better to paraphrase what the subject spoke about rather than quoting the whole material, per MOS:QUOTATIONS. 
* When ready to proceed with the rewritten information, kindly change the  template's answer parameter to read from  to . Thank you!
Regards,  Spintendo  02:00, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with these points and would add that it would be good to add the reference to the keynote address that you mention . Otherwise the additions are fine in my view. EPadmirateur (talk) 15:23, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for your feedback. Do you think that "Stance on Free Expression" should become its own topic header, rather than placed within the presidency section?  StickerMug (talk) 18 December 2019  —Preceding undated comment added 21:59, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Reply 15-DEC-2019

message: Spintendo  08:48, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Reply 23-DEC-2019

message: Don't put U.S. after people's births, deaths and residences. Arek333 (talk) 03:07, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Don't put U.S. after residences and births and deaths because Hailey Stevens don't like