Talk:Tej P. Singh

NPOV Concern

I have added a neutrality dispute, because this article reads like an advertisement, not like a biographical encyclopedia entry. Further, I believe that this article violates all three core principles of Wikipedia biographies. Given the nature of the material, it is also quite possible that the article is an example of autobiography. I will give some of the many possible examples.

• Introducing the subject of the article as "a scientific leader who has made original and novel contributions" represents a significant slant. This sort of laudatory language is not appropriate for an introduction to an encyclopedia article. Eminent academics who have made important contributions to their fields are typically introduced by their field of work, their institution, and factual details that suggest their importance, such as awards or organizational memberships, not by a Wikipedia editor simply stating that the subject is important. For examples of well-developed articles on similar subjects which follow this format, see Stephen Wolfram, Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar, Judith Butler, or Cornel West.
• The problem of deeply partial language is repeated throughout the article, with language like "he established a flourishing school of structural biology and new drug discovery", or "These studies have provided valuable insights into the structural basis of iron-binding".
• None of these laudatory claims are cited. Some of them could be cited, if they are true, such as the claim that the subject "has published more than 350 research papers". Some are not verifiable or even objective claims, such as the assertion that these papers were published "in leading international journals".
• The list of achievements in the Introduction would be appropriate for a CV, but listing someone's achievements simply for the sake of listing their achievements is not appropriate content for a neutral encyclopedia article. This problem is repeated, far more egregiously, in the Awards and Honors section.
• Referring to the subject throughout as "Professor Tej Singh" is contrary to Wikipedia's Manual of Style, but contributes to the overall tone of heaping praise upon the article's subject.
• The section on Work has problems that are subtle and more difficult to pin down. This is a very detailed description of the work produced by the subject's working group, of the sort that might appear on an academic's website. This violates a few rules of biography on Wikipedia, but perhaps the most relevant is that, for notable people who are not well-known public figures, articles should not include too many details unrelated to that person's notability.

I suggest that the article be substantially culled, its tone radically changed, and citations introduced where possible, so that the article will conform to the principles of Neutral Point of View, Verifiability, and No Original Research. If citations cannot be found, the article is a strong candidate for deletion. - Astrophobe (talk) 20:38, 12 February 2016 (UTC)