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 is within the scope of WikiProject Chemical and Bio Engineering, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Chemical and Bio EngineeringWikipedia:WikiProject Chemical and Bio EngineeringTemplate:WikiProject Chemical and Bio EngineeringChemical and Bio Engineering articles
Michael Laufer is part of WikiProject Open Access, a collaborative attempt at improving the coverage of topics related to Open Access and at improving other articles with the help of materials from Open Access sources. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Open AccessWikipedia:WikiProject Open/Open access task forceTemplate:WikiProject Open AccessOpen access articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anarchism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of anarchism 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.AnarchismWikipedia:WikiProject AnarchismTemplate:WikiProject Anarchismanarchism articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Molecular Biology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Molecular Biology 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.Molecular BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject Molecular BiologyTemplate:WikiProject Molecular BiologyMolecular Biology articles
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
There was a section called "reception". Then User:Czar, noted we don't tend to have a "reception" of people, and changed it to "legacy". I felt that sounded like he was dead, so I changed it to "influence". Today, User:Asilvering changed it to "reception" taking us back to the starting point. I avoided calling it "critique" as that has a negative connotation and the contents are a mix of negative, neutral and positive. Maybe we should try to reach consensus here before any more edits? Obviously two of us felt like "reception" was fine, but Czar didn't.... CT55555 (talk) 20:58, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
His career isn't a creative work so it's not being appraised by critics. The way most articles handle this is to incorporate any accolades/responses in context of covering the subject matter (i.e., whatever aspect of his career is under discussion). I'm not necessarily convinced that the quoted commentary warrants inclusion in this case either. czar03:10, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oh lol. I should have checked first. I changed it from "Influence" because I didn't think there was any reason to suggest he was "influencing" those people who were responding (they've all clearly been contacted by a reporter about it for response; seems overblown). Checking a couple of people I thought might have a "reception" or similar section just now, I came up with Reception (Judith Butler), Impact (Simone de Beauvoir), Legacy (dead people only), and about seven start-class-sized articles, which didn't use a separate heading. Most of those didn't have anything similar, but a few did, and incorporated comments into discussion of the individual book/work/etc.
I can't say I care much in any particular direction, but I'm with @Czar on both counts. Everything but the last sentence is a re-cite; if it were me, I don't think it would have occurred to me to use any of those quotes in the first place. (While we're here, the line about 18 languages is both a weird thing to mention in the context of the rest of the article and not confirmed by an independent source.) -- asilvering (talk) 06:12, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Another option is to recast that section as a single paragraph on Ethics, whether it exists in a dedicated section or not czar02:04, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
A bit like asilvering I don't have strong feelings. I looked at other articles and they don't have a comparable section. That said, the others aren't inserting mechanical devices into human bodies, so he's a bit of an outlier, to put it mildly. I like the ethics idea. Are you volunteering @Czar, or is this a suggestion for me? CT55555 (talk) 02:08, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It was a suggestion but I've taken a stab anyway. :) For comparison, I wrote the first version of Josiah Zayner a while back, which deals with similar themes without a dedicated section for ethics commentary. czar02:54, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
