Talk:Peter Dunsby

COI

The subject of this article, at least based on the username, appears to be editing the article. Most recently removing sentences related to the misidentification of Mars. The text and references were restored to the article and a polite COI message was left on the user page.--MadeYourReadThis (talk) 22:23, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

The (author) speedy deletion tag added by User:peterdunsby has been removed. This user is not the sole author of the article and has a clear conflict of interest.--MadeYourReadThis (talk) 12:55, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Mars misidentification

Information about this cosmologist's misidentification of Mars has been restored, though in a less news writing style and more fact base. This information is notable and should remain in this biography of a living person, it will stay with him for the rest of his career and is appropriate for inclusion in this or any other biography. This is well within Wikipedia policy on biography of living persons. While the subject of this article (who at least appears to be editing the article) may find this information uncomfortable, it has been verified in multiple reliable sources and should not be censored--MadeYourReadThis (talk) 22:37, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

This information has been restored again following this edit (with comment Removed content that’s damaging to my credibility) presumably by the subject of this article. Warning added to the user's page, will request a block if this persists.--MadeYourReadThis (talk) 12:20, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Is including the Mars misidentification consistent with WP:UNDUE and WP:NOTNEWS? While I don't plan to edit this biography, I very strongly believe that the Mars misidentification is unencyclopedic under WP:UNDUE and/or WP:NOTNEWS. The news coverage of the Mars misidentification treats Prof. Dunsby's mistake as a novelty worthy of a good laugh, but there are no claims that it is of enduring notability. The only reason that this error has received any media coverage at all is because a cosmology professor's misidentification of Mars apparently makes for a good headline.

Unlike notable scientific errors, such as the subsequently discredited detections of the first exoplanetary systems a few decades ago, Prof. Dunsby's error did not lead to a major scientific misunderstanding or to spurious advances in astronomy. Moreover, it seems that Prof. Dunsby isn't even an observational astronomer; he is a theorist who pursues astrophotography as a hobby, so this error wasn't even in the course of his actual research.

By mentioning his error, Wikipedia is helping to define this professor's career by permanently branding him with a mistake that would probably be forgotten otherwise. The relevant question is what independent, reliable sources say about the notability of the error, and unless they claim that his error has had (or will have) lasting repercussions in astronomy, it should not be mentioned in his biography. Otherwise, editors will substitute their subjective judgment about notability for that of independent, reliable sources. Put another way, a one-time spurt of media coverage is not evidence of enduring notability.

I propose three possible courses of action for the community to consider: (1) immediately remove all mention of the Mars misidentification, (2) reduce it to one sentence to avoid placing undue attention on it, or (3) wait a month or so, reassess the question of enduring notability, and remove all mention of the Mars identification if enduring notability has not been established by that time.

129.74.243.32 (talk) 00:32, 27 March 2018 (UTC)