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 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
This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
Since I see that there is a disagreement about the lead paragraph of the article, now is a good time to start a discussion here on the article's talk page. While starting the article with Professor Piecuch's Distinguished Professor status certainly emphasizes his importance, it is not as informative to readers as information about his field of study. Perhaps a compromise leading paragraph can be written which contains both pieces of information. —Anne Delong (talk) 02:12, 25 June 2013 (UTC)Reply
Please take into account that this is Jahansen's first article and he/she likely has no idea about the manual of style, or any experience with gaining consensus with other editors. I remember how upset I was when someone came along and changed all of the date formats on my first article with no explanation. I changed them back and caused a big stink. I know it's time consuming, but explaining and discussing any changes here will help Jahansen gain experience with Wikipedia's editing environment and this will benefit Wikipedia in the long run.—Anne Delong (talk) 03:21, 25 June 2013 (UTC)Reply
That, presumably is why you added {{cleanup}}, {{copy edit}} and {{lead rewrite}} templates to the article when you moved it across to article space, to help User:Jahansen realise that creation is the beginning of the process, not the end. Stuartyeates (talk) 03:56, 25 June 2013 (UTC) Sorry, that was unhelpful, I'm going to take a break. Stuartyeates (talk) 03:57, 25 June 2013 (UTC)Reply
Striking out your comment, yet leaving it viewable, and then apologizing for it, is not very helpful either. I know I am new to this and any help is appreciated, especially with changing the article to come into compliance with Wikipedia:Manual of Style. However, some of what you added is not entirely true. For example, he is not Polish American, he is Polish Canadian American (citizenship in all three countries), which is information I was planning to add once I learned how to create the information box that usually appears to the right, and allows one to add nationality(ies), among other information. If the article is going to be changed, it must be done in a manner that keeps it factual, and if changes need to be made to come into compliance with Wikipedia:Manual of Style I welcome those changes, as long as they are changes based on facts, not on what one thinks the information should be. This being my first article, I can honestly say, with the exception of Anne Delong, this has been a most unpleasant and unhelpful experience dealing with the wikipedia staff/helpers. Sorry, that was unhelpful. Jahansen (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:13, 25 June 2013 (UTC)Reply
Jahansen, I think Stuartyeates's strikeout comments were aimed at me, and I don't mind. I prefer to interact with people who say what they think. It's unlikely you have been involved with any of the very few "staff" that Wikipedia has. We're mostly all just volunteer editors like you. Everyone is trying to improve the encyclopedia; the challenge is to find a consensus among so many such different people. Stuart's idea of putting the nationality in the lead paragraph was a good one; you had more accurate information and you added it. Done, and both parties are happy with it. Ta-da! By the way, a good way to add an infobox is to find another professor's page that has one, copy the whole box format, and then change the information after the equal signs in the box. It's okay to leave some parts empty; they won't show up until you put something after the equal sign. —Anne Delong (talk) 14:04, 26 June 2013 (UTC)Reply
Anne Delong, thank you for your help and comments, and I do appreciate the challenge faced with this type of project and making sure the information is not only accurate, but also informative and easy to read. I am happy that Stuart is happy with the changes made, and as I said before, I welcome other changes that will help make this article better as well. I will do as you suggested for the info box, a truly brilliant idea, thank you again! Jahansen (talk) 14:36, 26 June 2013 (UTC)Reply
