Talk:Vincent Gaffney

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedy deleted as an unambiguous copyright infringement, because... (your reason here) --Digistuffuk3 (talk) 18:07, 12 February 2018 (UTC) The apparent copyrights appear to largely refer to factual issues, including research activities and publications, and these are surely unavoidable in bibliographic entries. the single image was actually Provided to professor Gaffney and he is using this with permission. presumably if this is provided through a wikipedia commons licence this is resolved?

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedy deleted as an unambiguous copyright infringement, because...although I believe the apparent copyright infringement relates to factual content I admit I am a newbie here and struggling with the intricacies of wikipedia. However, following a discussion on this matter, we have arranged for all copyright material to be released and and a permissions mail has been sent by the copyright holder at 19:09 on the 12th of February and I presume once accepted - I have an automated response from permisssions - that this matter will be resolved? I may have put this response in several places and apologise if this is the case--Digistuffuk3 (talk) 19:20, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

We have looked at other comparative biographies eg Maria Gimbutas, which is regarded as of being high importance and do not see much significant difference in content or tone. There are appropriate references to controversy withi the article eg sedaDNA at Bouldnor or the Durrington anomalies. we believe any TAGS should be removed for community commentDigistuffuk3 (talk) 14:42, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

RCUK

@Joe Roe: We think you should reverse the exclusion of research within the RCUK top 100 list for Vincent Gaffney- this is notable - the list represents the best research taking place in UK higher education and what it will mean for us in 20 years time. It features research from all fields including science, engineering, social sciences, medicine and the arts and humanities - no other archaeology research made this list Digistuffuk3 (talk) 11:42, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

@Digistuffuk3:. As far as I can tell it's a one-off promotional brochure, so we have no way of independently verifying its significance as an 'honour'. It also only includes a paragraph on the Doggerland project and doesn't mention Gaffney by name. That isn't the sort of thing we usually include in academic biographies, and I really don't think it does anything except promote the subject. We don't need to tell our readers that Gaffney's work is exciting; it should (and does) speak for itself. – Joe (talk) 12:29, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Copied from User talk:Joe Roe#Vincent Gaffney. – Joe (talk) 12:31, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Actually it's a report from the body governing the whole of British Research (http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/Publications/reports/BigIdeas/) - it does indeed promote British Research across its entirety and examples were used on the basis of excellence and significance. It explicitly states the use of data from the team led by Gaffney at Birmingham Digistuffuk3 (talk) 13:51, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Vince Gaffney.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:09, 18 February 2021 (UTC)