This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article was created or improved during the Celebrating Women Scientists edit-a-thon hosted by the Women in Red project in 2016. The editor(s) involved may be new; please assume good faith regarding their contributions before making changes.Women in RedWikipedia:WikiProject Women in RedTemplate:WikiProject Women in RedWomen in Red articles
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
Joan Adler is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women scientists, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women in science on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women scientistsWikipedia:WikiProject Women scientistsTemplate:WikiProject Women scientistsWomen scientists articles
Your/a CV is not a reference? It wouldnt work in her Phd thesis and it wont work here. Can you find 3rd party reliable refs that show her notability? Victuallers (talk) 20:17, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
CVs are acceptable as sources for factual information, but not for opinion. Notability is something separate; the relevant criterion is WP:PROF, which Adler passes triply, as a highly-cited researcher (#C1 of WP:PROF; see Google scholar), as the president of a major academic society (#C6), and as a fellow (a highly selective and honorific grade of membership; #C3) in another major academic society. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:36, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I removed this since in most well written biographies, it is not placed there. This information is in the info box and can go in the main body. If we want to go against MOS, that's fine just get consensus, thank you. Malerooster (talk) 11:54, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
All claims in an infobox must be summaries of material in the article. Your edits violate that. I agree with removal of the place (and the precise date) from the lead, as not lead-worthy, but they should be restored later in the article. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:01, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I she that the subject has dual nationality. This should still be included in the lead sentence. Does somebody want to take a stab at that? I usually stick to single nationalities. Thank you, Malerooster (talk) 11:56, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In cases where there is doubt because of significant activity in multiple nations, I think we should omit any claims of citizenship altogether without reliable publications. That means from the infobox too. In this case Australian/Israeli dual nationality looks like the most likely possibility, but we should not operate on guesswork in this sort of matter. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:00, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Never mind, I see that the archived cv states her nationality explicitly. I will restore it with a source. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:05, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=logo}
.jpg){kind=small}
