Talk:Corinna Löckenhoff

Some proposed changes

Someone created this wikipedia site about me without my knowledge. I'm just a random academic, not a public figure, and don't really need a wikipedia page. The problem is, the page is wrong. It's misrepresenting my affiliations, it's misrepresenting my work, it has typos and looks highly unprofessional. I'm currently up for promotion and when I noticed the faulty page I tried to fix it immediately so nobody who is supposed to review me gets the wrong impression.

None of the changes I made are controversial in any way - they just make sure that my affiliations are correct, my work is described correctly, and readers are pointed to original sources describing my work (instead of excerpts from news articles that are glossing over key details). I provided cites for all the info.

When I finally got it fixed (took me a couple of hours since I don't speak "Wikipedia") I realized that soon thereafter Drm310 undid my edits Could someone please to one of the following (1) completely delete the page (I really don't need one, my departmental website is all the professional representation I need) (2) turn it to a stub that reads "Corinna Löckenhoff is an associate professor of Human Development at Cornell University and Gerontology in Medicine at Weill Cornell Medicine and a Fellow of the Gerontological Society of America.[1]" it should have my Orcid ID at the bottom along with a link to my google scholar site. (3) let my original edits stand

Thanks in advance.

Loeckenhoff (talk) 15:20, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

• Orcid ID is present in the authority control section.
• Google Scholar link is in External links.

All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 22:09, 12 January 2020 (UTC).
s

Reply 10-JAN-2020

  Unable to implement  

• Requests to delete an article are handled through articles for deletion.
• Requests to change content in an article are handled in the form of "Change x to y using z".

Change x to y using z

x A verbatim description of the old text to be removed from the article (if any) y A verbatim description of the new text to be added to the article (if any) z A reference which verifies the requested change Example edit request: Please change: The Sun's diameter is 25 miles. ↑ This is x ↑ to read as: The Sun's diameter is 864,337 miles. ↑ This is y ↑ using as a reference: Harinath, Prisha (2020). The Sun. Academic Press. p. 1. ↑ This is z ↑

Kindly open a new edit request at your earliest convenience when ready to proceed.
Regards,  Spintendo  02:41, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Comments from Women in Red

In connection with discussions on this on Women in Red, I have made the following comment: "Maybe the best solution under the present circumstances is to have the article deleted but I must say I think it is wrong to disallow corrections made by the person in question on the simple grounds of "COI". If these had been permitted, the article could have been maintained as it usefully documents an academic who is perhaps not yet top notch but is nevertheless contributing constructively to her field of interest. The need for secondary sources was introduced as a means of preventing articles being based solely on primary sources without any wider evidence of notability. However, when secondary sources are partly inaccurate, it should be possible to make corrections on the basis of primary sources, whether the changes come from the subject of a biography or any other editor. In my experience, as articles progress inaccuracies of this type are generally eliminated but in the case of new articles, it is not unusual for them to be maintained for some time. Wikipedia should not be allowed to threaten people's careers by insisting on maintaining them in spite of clear contradictions with authentic sources, nor is it reasonable to expect newbies to be able to follow all Wikipedia's rigid rules and procedures. Maybe over the course of time existing policy on these matters could be amended. In any case, I am not very happy about how this case is proceeding. It's not good for the subject of the biography, not good for Wikipedia and not good for Women in Red's efforts to cover many more women academics."--Ipigott (talk) 11:03, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks to everyone who made the edits!

@Ipigott: I can see your point, but I am actually fine with how this worked out in the end. I learned how to work the system, got the changes I wanted (the article now looks great), and I learned important info about talk pages etc. that'll come in handy in the future in evaluating the info in wikipedia entries. Thanks!

Loeckenhoff (talk) 03:55, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

I'm really glad to see everything has been sorted out and that you now no longer wish to have the article deleted. Congratulations on your promotion to full professor. I hope that in future you'll find time to contribute further to Wikipedia, perhaps adding biographies of other successful women academics. Happy editing!--Ipigott (talk) 08:15, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Request edit on 1 September 2020

PLEASE REPLACE: She was elected fellow of the Gerontological Society of America in 2016.[9][10] REPLACE WITH: She is a fellow of the Gerontological Society of America [9][10] and the Association for Psychological Science [11].

THIS IS TO REFLECT MY RECENT ELECTION AS FELLOW TO THE ASSOCIATION FOR PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE PLEASE CITE THIS AS REFERENCE [11] https://www.psychologicalscience.org/members/fellows

THANKS!

Loeckenhoff (talk) 15:55, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

 Done @Loeckenhoff: I added and the Association for Psychological Science in 2020 as we like to maintain the year being elected. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 05:16, 12 October 2020 (UTC)