Talk:Richard Eastell

Retraction?

I'm curious to know about the assertion here that a Guardian article discussing Eastell was retracted. The article is still available (here), which is hard to reconcile with the idea that it has been retracted. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 14:29, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

I have the retraction as a scan only; email me and I'll send it on to you. Stifle (talk) 14:35, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Extension of article

We have received a submission to extend the article, which is licensed under CC-BY-SA-3.0 only and can be found here. I will be adding appropriate sections from it into the article. Stifle (talk) 13:21, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Copyright issues? Seems clear

Eastell's autobiography is at [1]

And reads as follows:

I received a clinical fellowship from the Medical Research Council to study osteoporosis at the University of Edinburgh in 1978. I furthered my clinical research training by working at the Mayo Clinic under the supervision of Dr B L Riggs where I worked for five years. I developed a number of new approaches for studying osteoporosis while at the Mayo Clinic including the use of stable (non-radioactive) isotopes to measure the absorption of calcium from food, the use of an infusion technique to measure the production of the active form of vitamin D, the measurement of bone density at the site in the wrist where fractures commonly occur (the ultradistal radius) and a height ratio approach to identifying vertebral fractures on radiographs of the spine. I began my training in endocrinology and diabetes at the Western General Hospital in Edinburgh in 1980 and continued it at Northwick Park Hospital in Harrow in 1982 and at the Mayo Clinic in 1987.

"I joined the Department of Human Metabolism and Clinical Biochemistry at the University of Sheffield in 1989 as a Senior Research Fellow. I set up a metabolic bone service at the Northern General Hospital and am an Honorary NHS Consultant. I became Professor of Bone Metabolism in 1995 and received funding from the Arthritis Research Campaign to use biochemical tests of bone turnover to better understand the way in which older men and women develop osteoporosis and propensity to fracture.

My studies on the cause, diagnosis, prevention and treatment of osteoporosis have been conducted with the support of many colleagues; I have supervised the study for higher degree of 36 scientists and doctors over the past 20 years. I have published over 320 research papers.

I am currently Director of the Mellanby Centre based at the University of Sheffield. I became a NIHR Senior Investigator in 2009. Some of my recent contributions have been authorship on key papers describing new treatments for osteoporosis, such as tibolone, zoledronic acid, denosumab and lasofoxifene as well as addressing issues about safety of medications and provide guidelines to diagnose primary hyperparathyroidism, a common disorder resulting in high levels of blood calcium.

My work as a clinical investigator was recognised in 2014, by the Frederick C Bartter Award from the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Material in bold is precisely and exactly duplicated in this BLP. The source is cited, but exact copying of wording seems worse than problematic here - Collect (talk) 15:48, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Note: this was added with a cc-by-sa claim by [2] in 2010, but that does not mean we can quote it verbatim without making it absolutely clear that the source is auto-biographical with only "I" being changed at all. The current site asserts simple copyright, so the cc-by-sa claim is not shown on the site given. Alas. Collect (talk) 15:57, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Professional Life section rewritten - hopefully this should now resolve any copyright issues flagged. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.167.109.154 (talk) 07:57, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Per OTRS ticket 2016051910015053, noting a temporary version created at Talk:Richard Eastell/Temp which seeks to address any copyright issues. I don't see that previously linked here. Pinging those involved to some degree on this page: @Collect and Stifle: Thanks! ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 17:56, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

It appears to be the same as the version identified as a copyright violation... Nomoskedasticity (talk) 18:23, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

OTRS permission?

Perhaps I'm being dumber than usual, but this seems to be a right muddle. There's an OTRS ticket about this article, 2016051910015053, but no OTRS permission template on this page, the talk-page of the article. Nihonjoe, Mdann, can you cast any light on this? Does either of you see a clear statement of permission from Eastell there? I ask because I don't. But if there is one, perhaps we could log it here and that would tie this up.

Stifle, can you help me understand what you meant when you wrote "submission from Prof. Eastell; CC-BY-SA3.0" as your edit summary when you made this edit (which on the face of it appears to be just a massive copyvio), and what you meant when you wrote above "We have received a submission to extend the article, which is licensed under CC-BY-SA-3.0 only". Why did you believe the text was useable here (obviously you did, I'm not questioning your good faith), and where did it come from? The page you linked to is a subpage that you yourself created (and which I've now nominated for deletion, btw). Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 00:40, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Ping Mdann52 after ping fail above. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 00:41, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

The OTRS ticket 2016051910015053 does not give permission. The last action on the ticket was to ask the person to clarify the permissions by posting here directly. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 01:00, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Unfortunately, it being over six years ago, I've no recollection of the issue. May as well delete it. Stifle (talk) 09:23, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Fair enough. We can't host that content unless/ until proper permission is received and logged, so I've asked for the revisions that include it to be hidden. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:40, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

143.167.109.154 (talk) 13:18, 21 March 2017 (UTC) Institution consent given via email to Wikipedia licensing team on 01 March 2017 to allow for biographical information from the University of Sheffield website (originally written by Eastell) to be used on the wikipedia page.

Help

143.167.109.154 (talk) 15:16, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Please could you explain why the most recent edit was undone. This is biographical information of a living person?

All material added to a biography of a living person must be sourced from independent reliable secondary sources. Sources closely connected to the subject are almost never considered as acceptable under WP:RS. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:46, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

To reinforce -- receiving permission from the license holder means that using the material doesn't amount to plagiarism -- but that doesn't mean we *must* use it. I agree with the conclusion here that we shouldn't use it. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 16:29, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Just to clarify one more thing: there is no acceptable permission in place for the University of Sheffield content. There's a new ticket (VRTS ticket # ) in addition to the one discussed above, but like the previous one, it does not provide sufficient permission. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 00:18, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

recent deletions

Anyone who wants to discuss the material repeatedly deleted (by @Babdk63:) -- please use this section. It's evident to me that it belongs in the article, on the basis of the sources being used. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 06:10, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Controversies Section

As mentioned in the latest comment when deleting the Controversies Section, Eastell was not found guilty, and as per Wikipedia's rules on 'guilty unless proven innocent'. this has no place being here (

):

"A living person accused of a crime is presumed innocent until convicted by a court of law. Accusations, investigations and arrests do not amount to a conviction. For individuals who are not public figures—that is, individuals not covered by § Public figures—editors must seriously consider not including material—in any article—that suggests the person has committed or is accused of having committed a crime, unless a conviction has been secured."

@Nomoskedasticity created this page with the sole purpose of highlighting the "Controversy" (see https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Richard_Eastell&oldid=319492232), which contravenes Wikipedia's rules.

If @Nomoskedasticity is going to insist on reverting back to previous versions without any explanation, it feels that we need to get an

involved. AFrozenCookieMonster (talk) 12:29, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

This is an inappropriate use of the admin help template. This is a content dispute and should be resolved in the usual methods of dispute resolution, including this page. Another possible forum would be WP:BLPN.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:38, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I am new to this and thought this was the way to do this. I have now found the Biography of Living Persons Noticeboard and posted there. Thank you for your help. AFrozenCookieMonster (talk) 15:35, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Updates (Potential COI)

Hi, as I have explained before, I am Richard Eastell's son - just want to admit/remind of this upfront.

I am just making some clear cut neutral changes initially (adding a link, fixing a misspell, adding in awards - purely factually), but am hoping to make/suggest some other additions in the coming weeks / months. Would I be OK to post these in this section (within the talk page) and see if anyone can help add them in (as I wouldn't feel comfortable doing this myself), or would there be a more appropriate way to suggest updates?

Many thanks. AFrozenCookieMonster (talk) 15:44, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

• I'm watching the page, and will try to slowly deal with a low volume of requests. You can also use "template:Edit COI" if necessary. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 16:04, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

  Great - thanks Russ. Will look into the Edit COI template and use this in future (sorry just seen your reply now). AFrozenCookieMonster (talk) 16:41, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

  I saw your update and the further update by @Nomoskedasticity.

  I'm a bit confused why this isn't all relevant.

  In the same way an actors Wikipedia page would display every film they have ever been in (no matter how small the part), why wouldn't an academics page detail every award they have received?

  Also, you note that this should only be recent awards @Nomoskedasticity - this doesn't feel in keeping with Wikipedia at all - unless you plan to log on once a year to remove any old awards? I can't see this happening for every biography, else surely it would be an automatic feature build in to Wikipedia?

  If you can show me any guidance related to this to help me understand where I went wrong, that would be much appreciated. Otherwise, just deleting referenced factual material feels like personal preference on your part? AFrozenCookieMonster (talk) 20:22, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

I've already linked to the relevant guidance: Wikipedia is not a place to post a resume/CV. If you are interested in editing pages about actors, that's something open to you. I focus on academics, and I'm in no doubt about my understanding of what's considered appropriate. In addition: in general, material included on a Wikipedia page should have a WP:SECONDARY source -- and none of those awards were supported with a secondary source. I kept only the recent ones despite that policy in the spirit of compromise. Another editor as well made clear their disagreement with your edit. I won't mind at all if someone else deletes the entire section. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 20:44, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

You appear to have linked to a generic article about Self Promotion? The closest I can see is point 4 regarding Self-promotion, which says you shouldn't reference personal projects, nothing to do with externally referenced, career-defining awards, each of which is notable enough to be referenced either in news or on the the websites of notable organisations?

Again, I would appreciate it if you can give specific guidance on why this is wrong, but from what you have linked to, it is not obvious to me?

Again, I apologise if I am missing something obvious here. AFrozenCookieMonster (talk) 21:10, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

My opinion is that in a situation like in this article (late career, , the awards that we should generally list are the sourced awards that might be a plausible pass of WP:NPROF C2/C3. So, fellowships in scholarly societies, lifetime achievement awards; but not invited talks (except in very rare situations), not early-mid career awards, etc. Sourcing to the awarding organization is ok in this situation, but we should generally be expecting more than a self-published source like a CV. It was clear to me that a few of the awards on the previous list definitely did not belong there, and that several did belong there. The general guideline is WP:NOTINDISCRIMINATE. I've come to believe that Awards sections are better formatted as paragraphs, rather than bullet lists. An Awards section is a place where a COIed editor should generally step lightly; AFrozenCookieMonster, you could help us providing sources for awards (and summaries of why the awards was granted, etc). Russ Woodroofe (talk) 11:58, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the well-reasoned explanation - that makes a lot of sense!

I will look into it and get back to you when I can.

Sorry for the delayed response - wife and I were both ill and struggling to look after the kids! AFrozenCookieMonster (talk) 09:57, 8 January 2024 (UTC)