Talk:Hans Henrich Hock
| 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. |
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
Tone and Essay tags edit
I had tagged this for {{tone}} and {{essay-like}} back in June but apparently never put down any reasoning. In case it isn't self-evident, here we go. In short, this article reads a lot like Hock's curriculum vitae. I'd improve it myself, but honestly, I've never been too clear on what a good academic article should look like, nor how to really find notability for academics. Not that I'm questioning his notability per se- if anything I'd have to recuse myself from judging that, having taken at least one course from Hock in my days at UIUC.
But as to the tone, sentences such as "His research interests include general historical and comparative linguistics, as well as the linguistics of Sanskrit" and "He can read and speak a number of other languages—both modern and extinct—with varying ability" strike me as violating the "professional tone" tenet of WP:TONE. The latter sentence is further questionable as it would appear to come from a primary source (namely, Hock's personal webpage).
The essay-like concerns, I think are shared with the tone concerns- the article reads like a simple biographical entry describing Hock as a person rather than really discussing his notable accomplishments and publications.
Honestly, I'd considered taking this to AfD at that time, citing WP:NOTDIRECTORY and WP:IINFO concerns, but I don't think this article is quite that bad. —/Mendaliv/2¢/Δ's/ 20:56, 26 August 2008 (UTC)