Talk:Michael H. Hart

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to the intersection of race/ethnicity and human abilities and behaviour, which is a contentious topic. Please consult the procedures and edit carefully.

Arbitration Ruling on Race and Intelligence

The article Michael H. Hart, along with other articles relating to the area of conflict (namely, the intersection of race/ethnicity and human abilities and behaviour, broadly construed), is currently subject to active arbitration remedies, described in a 2010 Arbitration Committee case where the articulated principles included:

Pillars: Wikipedia articles must be neutral, verifiable and must not contain original research. Those founding principles (the Pillars) are not negotiable and cannot be overruled, even when apparent consensus to do so exists.
Original research: Wikipedia defines "original research" as "facts, allegations, ideas, and stories not already published by reliable sources". In particular, analyses or conclusions not already published in reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy are not appropriate for inclusion in articles.
Correct use of sources: Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published secondary sources and, to a lesser extent, on tertiary sources. Primary sources are permitted if used carefully. All interpretive claims, analyses, or synthetic claims about primary sources must be referenced to a secondary source, rather than to original analysis of the primary-source material by Wikipedia editors.
Advocacy: Wikipedia strives towards a neutral point of view. Accordingly, it is not the appropriate venue for advocacy or for advancing a specific point of view. While coverage of all significant points of view is a necessary part of balancing an article, striving to give exposure to minority viewpoints that are not significantly expressed in reliable secondary sources is not.
Single purpose accounts: Single purpose accounts are expected to contribute neutrally instead of following their own agenda and, in particular, should take care to avoid creating the impression that their focus on one topic is non-neutral, which could strongly suggest that their editing is not compatible with the goals of this project.
Decorum: Wikipedia users are expected to behave reasonably, calmly, and courteously in their interactions with other users; to approach even difficult situations in a dignified fashion and with a constructive and collaborative outlook; and to avoid acting in a manner that brings the project into disrepute. Unseemly conduct, such as personal attacks, incivility, assumptions of bad faith, harassment, or disruptive point-making, is prohibited.
Tag-team editing: Tag teams work in unison to push a particular point of view. Tag-team editing – to thwart core policies (neutral point of view, verifiability, and no original research); or to evade procedural restrictions such as the three revert rule or to violate behavioural norms by edit warring; or to attempt to exert ownership over articles; or otherwise to prevent consensus prevailing – is prohibited.

If you are a new editor, or an editor unfamiliar with the situation, please follow the above guidelines. You may also wish to review the full arbitration case page. If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first.

This article was previously nominated for deletion. The result of the discussion was keep.

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 sourced must 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.

Biography: Science and Academia

	Biography portal 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
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group.

Physics: Biographies Low‑importance

	Physics portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Biographies Taskforce.

Best seller

The assertions that his book was on the best-seller list are unsubstantiated. The separate article The_100_(book) on the book gives a re-issue date 1992, but here's the NY Times list of top books for 1992: Revolution from Within by Gloria Steinem (Little, Brown) - February 9, 1992

Give War a Chance by P. J. O'Rourke (Atlantic Monthly) - May 10, 1992

The Silent Passage by Gail Sheehy (Random House) - June 7, 1992

Diana: Her True Story by Andrew Morton (Simon & Schuster) - July 5, 1992

Every Living Thing by James Herriot (St. Martin's) - September 13, 1992

The Way Things Ought to Be by Rush H. Limbaugh (Pocket) - September 27, 1992

Sex by Madonna (Warner) - November 8, 1992

A search of the whole NY times list did not produce the name of Dr. Hart's book. Of course it could have been #5 or #6 - if so document it.Carrionluggage 04:17, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edits

The bibliography is not the place for discussion of the faults of a book. We can start a paragraph discussing his individual works, but I'm not sure the fact that a later edition of one work was not sufficently updated in the mind of one reviewer is significant enough for an encyclopedia article on the author.

The man worked for NASA, no? He taught physics, no? Then he's a physicist. "Claimed astrophysicist" is waaaay too loaded and POV. Since he's a full time writer now, I believe, it really doesn't matter if he's not a member of professional physics organizations, and there is no source for this anyway. Gamaliel 02:24, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

1994

The article mentions that "At a 1994 conference, he had a public confrontation with former Klansman and former Louisiana politician David Duke", probably because the linked splcenter.org article says "At the latest edition of the conferences that began in 1994, held this February at the Hyatt Dulles hotel, a nasty spat broke out that upset the gathering's decorum". Since the article has no date we have no idea which February is "this February", but it is probably not 1994... --CrisDias 17:54, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I had a look at that SPLC article. It's dated "Summer 2006"--so, given the "this February" you point out, 2006 seems pretty darn indisputable for a date. Iralith (talk) 16:22, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WHAT DOES THE BOOK DO! HA —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.150.66.218 (talk) 21:31, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Questionable links from other Wikipedia articles to Hart's personal opinion on who's most influential

Somebody inserted many links from Wikipedia articles about truly notable personalities to Hart's list The_100. IMO Hart's personal opinion thus gains undeserved emphasis and credibility, although it is not more valuable than personal opinions expressed in many alternative lists (a few of them are mentioned below). IMO one should either delete all those links to Hart's list, or create Wikipedia articles for alternative lists, and add links from famous persons to those alternative lists, too. Otherwise Wikipedia biographies of influential persons will reflect undue bias towards Hart's personal opinions.

A top 10 list at http://www.faqs.org/shareranks/1338,Most-Influential-People-of-All-Time : 1 Manu (Shanker Mishra), 2 Einstein, 3 Socrates, 4 Aristotle, 5 Plato, 6 Newton, 7 Lao Tzu, 8 Moses, 9 Darwin, 10 Franklin.

A Japanese top 10 list http://www.japanprobe.com/2007/04/01/historys-100-most-influencial-people-hero-edition-video/ : 1 Sakamoto Ryoma, 2 Napoleon I, 3 Oda Nobunaga, 4 Saigo Takamori, 5 Miyamoto no Yoshitsune, 6 Jean of Arc, 7 Hideyoshi Toyotomi, 8 Albert Einstein, 9 Yutaka Ozaki, 10 Akechi Mitsuhide.

A top 7 list http://www.rateitall.com/t-1283-most-influential-people-in-world-history.aspx : 1 Jesus Christ, 2 Muhammad, 3 Adolf Hitler, 4 Ronald Reagan, 5 Albert Einstein, 6 Buddha, 7 Johann Gutenberg.

LIFE magazine's top 10 list http://www.smccd.edu/accounts/goth/MainPages/100_most_important_people.pdf : 1 Edison, 2 Columbus, 3 Luther, 4 Galileo, 5 Leonardo, 6 Newton, 7 Magellan, 8 Pasteur, 9 Darwin, 10 Jefferson.

Several lists are topped by Gutenberg, e.g.: http://www.falls.igs.net/~dphillips/biography3.htm

Another top 10 list http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=173626 : 1 Mohammed, 2 Aristotle, 3 Tsai Lun, 4 Johann Gutenberg, 5 Jesus of Nazareth, 6 Paul of Tarsus, 7 Shih Huang Ti, 8 Louis Pasteur, 9 Plato, 10 Siddhartha Guatama.

Yet another list found on the web: 1 Mitochondria Eve, 2 Jesus, 3 Mohammed, 4 Columbus, 5 Confucius, 6 Darwin, 7 Sun Yat-sen, 8 Karl Marx, 9 Buddha, 10 Rousseau.

Some of the numerous additional lists of this kind:

http://www.the-top-tens.com/lists/most-influential-person-of-all-time.asp

http://www.worldtop.org/Culture/People/Most+influential+people+ever/

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Who_are_the_25_most_important_people_in_history

http://www.historum.com/showthread.php?t=2971

Gimmemoretime (talk) 21:17, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RfC

BAn RfC: Which descriptor, if any, can be added in front of Southern Poverty Law Center when referenced in other articles? has been posted at the Southern Poverty Law Center talk page. Your participation is welcomed. – MrX 17:01, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Source list of possible use for editing this article

You may find it helpful while reading or editing articles to look at a bibliography of Anthropology and Human Biology Citations, posted for the use of all Wikipedians who have occasion to edit articles on human genetics and related issues. I happen to have circulating access to a huge academic research library system at a university with an active research program in these issues (and to other academic libraries in the same large metropolitan area) and have been researching these issues sporadically since 1989. You are welcome to use these citations for your own research. You can help other Wikipedians by suggesting new sources through comments on that page. It will be extremely helpful for articles on human genetics to edit them according to the Wikipedia standards for reliable sources for medicine-related articles, as it is important to get these issues as well verified as possible. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 15:52, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Citations for Shakespeare claim

The line about his claim for Shakespeare's identity is marked as needing a citation. I believe the first two references listed on the wikipedia page for his "100" book will suffice. I hope a skilled editor (which I am not) will add those citations. Note that these don't substantiate Hart's claim. They substantiate the fact that Hart made this claim. 99.116.150.17 (talk) 03:37, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Astrophysics

Although no longer practicing as an astrophysicist, some of his publications on extraterrestrial life in the 1970s-1980s are still cited today. This is completely separate discussion from the race-related views for which he is presently better known (and for which I personally have no sympathy). For balance, I think the article should cover this side of his life as well. It actually is already covered in some other articles in Wikipedia (see Fermi paradox), so all we need to do is copy that text from there to here. I'm going to do that. SJK (talk) 02:46, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Background and education?

Surely the article should start with some account of his birth and upbringing. Valetude (talk) 01:55, 20 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Michael H. Hart. 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/20131206213648/http://preservingwesternciv.com/about.html to http://preservingwesternciv.com/about.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:09, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]