Talk:Gene Hobbs

Photos added per request

I have added the photos per the request on my talk page and Mike's re-organizational edits here today.

I can also confirm I took the CHT exam, was certified as a cave diver and OW instructor in 1997 (from cite requests). We do also live in Durham which has been on my user page here for quite some time.

Thanks guys! Quite an honor. --Gene Hobbs (talk) 00:30, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

I've requested Gene to give us a link to his CV on RRR so that we can create references to an external source. That way the article can survive regardless of the fate of this talk page. --RexxS (talk) 21:43, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

I just updated my CV with a few more recent publications and it can be found here. Hope that helps. I will try to keep that one up to date.

Just because I have never referenced a tweet in Wikipedia before, should the whole tweet be included in the reference? I did not see anything in the help pages just now and only know of these guidelines. This seems like a place where the whole tweet could be easily included since we don't have space limitations here and would save editors time. It also archives the tweet in case something happens to the source. Interesting... :)

Thanks! --Gene Hobbs (talk) 23:57, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

It's a good question. Normally tweets and facebook entries, being self-published, don't normally qualify as reliable sources, so they don't get used much and the question doesn't get asked. Of course when you have a BLP, they are probably reasonably good sources of information about the person making them, but we still need to use them with care. It's worth noting that Wikipedia blocks most short urls like the t.co one you sent me, so I had to refactor it to the full facebook url. Thanks for the CV link though - I'll get those cn tags sorted out first thing tomorrow. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 01:30, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Notability and content

I've just reverted the removal of sourced content by Jac16888 as the reason given, "not notable that he did this", is a misunderstanding of our content policy. Notability is what determines whether an article exists; it is not a requirement for content of an article. It is clear that Gene has been a significant contributor to Wikipedia for many years and his contributions are proof of that. Although the content of Wikipedia is not a reliable source, its revision history definitely is. I am firmly of the opinion that Gene's Wikipedia contributions are a significant element in his biography and per our content policy should not be removed with such a flimsy reason. --RexxS (talk) 12:30, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

You are wrong. The fact that he happens to edit Wikipedia is not in itself notable unless it is also covered in reliable sources - being a Wikipedian is not itself noteworthy. For an example, it could be the case that Hobbs is also a regular user of Facebook - but we wouldn't include that in the article, or any other hobbies--Jac16888 ^Talk 12:50, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Please read Wikipedia:Notability and try to understand that it is the guideline we use to decide whether or not we have an article on a given subject. It is not the policy that governs the content of an article. The policy I already pointed you to above (along with verifiability and no original research) determines the content, not misplaced ideas about being noteworthy.

The mistake you make above is in assuming that editing Wikipedia is simply a hobby. It is not. Gene is well-known in the academic diving community as a regular advocate of participation in Wikipedia as a means of increasing awareness of diving medicine - and has published in the Undersea and Hyperbaric Medicine journal on the topic. Here's the abstract:

• Li, Josephine H; Hobbs, Gene W; Perkins, Robert W (2009). "The Use of Wikipedia for Increasing Awareness About Undersea and Hyperbaric Medicine. (Abstract)". Undersea and Hyperbaric Medicine. 36 (4). Undersea and Hyperbaric Medical Society: 253.

I'll add that to the article as it is a significant part of Gene's work with the Rubicon Research Repository. --RexxS (talk) 21:38, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Noteworthiness, notability, what I'm saying is that is if his being a wikipedian is not "of note" then it should not be in the article, and by of note I mean it should be covered in other sources, not just a contributions link, which is not any kind of reference. What you have added, what you are now saying does in fact make his being a Wikipedian worthy of inclusion because it establishes his editing as more than just him editing if that makes sense. I may not be explaining it very well, how about this, if Hobbs loves wine gums that does not belong on Wikipedia, if he loves wine gums and writes academic papers about wine gums while publicly advocating the eating of them enough that other people take notice, that does.--Jac16888 ^Talk 22:53, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Yes, it's what we normally call a significant fact - the sort of thing that we read about in reliable sources. The journal article reference, "Li2009", was already present in the article (although you removed it in your edit, perhaps without realising), but the text that it supported didn't really do justice to the source. Hopefully the article has now improved as a result. --RexxS (talk) 01:48, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

You're right I did, it was called Contribs or something and I mistook it for the contributions link. I'd say we have come out better off here--Jac16888 ^Talk 17:00, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Gene Hobbs. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110304224719/http://simcenter.duke.edu/3DiTeams_ASA07v3s.pdf to http://simcenter.duke.edu/3DiTeams_ASA07v3s.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120321031409/http://www.diversalertnetwork.org:80/research/projects/remo/index.asp to http://www.diversalertnetwork.org/research/projects/remo/index.asp
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120722020632/http://www.nsscds.org/files/uws/v39n3/uws39vol3asmallprintweb.pdf to http://www.nsscds.org/files/uws/v39n3/uws39vol3asmallprintweb.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:38, 9 January 2017 (UTC)