Talk:The Micropalaeontological Society

Latest comment: 9 years ago by Despondenttrilobite


Notability The page has been flagged with - The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines for companies and organizations. (May 2014). The Wikipedia page on Notability (organizations and companies) states that Organizations are usually notable if they meet both of the following standards:

  • The scope of their activities is national or international in scale.
  • Information about the organization and its activities can be verified by multiple,[1] third-party, independent, reliable sources.''

The first of these two criteria is clearly met - The Microaplaeontological Society is a professional academic society with international membership, it publishes an internationally regarded journal and organises meetings in Europe and the UK.

Verification of activities from multiple,[1] third-party, independent, reliable sources is perhaps most obviously provided by websites of other organisations etc citing specific TMS activities. I will add a short list here:

Primary Sources The page was also flagged with "This article relies on references to primary sources. (May 2014)" and with "This article may rely excessively on sources too closely associated with the subject, preventing the article from being verifiable and neutral. (May 2014)"

Since then referencing in the article has been significantly improved with a range of additional sources cited including appropriate secondary sources, notably articles written by R. Hodgkinson on the foundation of the society by D. J. Siveter on the Brady Medal and by Bernard Owens on early history of the society. Consequently I am removing these flagsJeremy Young (talk) 13:41, 17 June 2014 (UTC)Reply

Conflict of Interest The page was also flagged with "A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject." Both the main contributors to the article - palynologist and myself (Jeremy Young) - are indeed closely connected with the society. I have attempted to edit the article into a properly neutral point of view. I intend to ask a wikipedian who is active on other pages dealing with scientific societies but who is not associated with the Society to review the page and recommend any changes.Jeremy Young (talk) 13:59, 17 June 2014 (UTC)Reply

Hi. In addition to the issues that were highlighted above and have hopefully been resolved, amendments have been made to respond to the other questions raised over this page:

The lead contributors apparent close connection to the society has been addressed

The page no longer relies excessively on sources too close to the subject and this in turn has impacted on referencing. The use of references has been substantially amended to include mainly secondary and tertiary references.

Hopefully such changes will meet with Wikipedia's approval

--Palynologist (talk) 08:54, 29 May 2014 (UTC)Reply

I have reviewed the page and removed or edited various statements which seemed to me designed to promote the society, going beyond neutral reporting of what it does. Following this I have removed the CoI flag.Despondenttrilobite (talk) 10:31, 7 July 2014 (UTC)Reply