3 ms·

The current page was created in 2014. [edit: Although it looks like everything before 2018 got deleted in 2018? I don't understand all the notation on the histo

The current page was created in 2014. [edit: Although it looks like everything before 2018 got deleted in 2018? I don't understand all the notation on the history page. [0]] This is after she served in various roles (including president) at The Optical Society, and of course after developing chirped pulse amplification, for which she won the Nobel, during the 1980s. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Donna_Strickland&dir=prev&action=history https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Donna_Strickland&...

tptacek 5y ago
Are we looking at different things? I just wrote a whole long comment on this after poking around on WP about it, and I'd be glad to know if I got things completely scrambled. Because what I see is a page created in 2018, and a _lot_ of intra-WP coverage of the process that led to there not being a page before 2018, all of which squares with what this article says.
- jessaustin 5y ago
  I'm probably misunderstanding something, but I do see some 2014 dates at the bottom of the page linked above. ISTM wikipedia was informed of this scientist in some fashion in 2014, and those contributions were deleted or set aside or whatever. I'm happy to be educated on this, but at least we can say that the process is obscure. Of course the point is that GP's whinging about headlines is silly. Her Nobel paper was published in 1985.
  - tptacek 5y ago
    You're right, I missed the stub from 2014. It was speedy-deleted for copyright infringement.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
mjw1007 5y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=Donna+Strickland https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=... says that the 2014 version was deleted as "Unambiguous copyright infringement". That will be why those revisions are no longer accessible.
- jessaustin 5y ago
  That would be a valid justification in general, but I'm curious in this particular case. Was this an infringement of another encyclopedia? Perhaps that publication could have been identified in the deletion note? Maybe even cited in the page itself? Basic facts about a human (birthdate, alma mater, publications, etc.) are not subject to copyright anyway, so a long flowery essay about the scientist could have been edited to the bare essentials. However, I suspect no such long flowery essay actually existed in 2014. After all, Strickland was a woman who hadn't won the Nobel. Of course these questions are unanswerable due to the specific type of the deletion. Curious.
  - mgbennet 5y ago
    It's perfectly possible to find the source of the infringement with a little investigation. The user who created the page has a comment on their talk page notifying them that Donna Strickland page has been nominated for deletion due to "unambiguous copyright deletion". [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:SteplightJohnson#Speedy_deletion_nomination_of_Donna_Strickland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:SteplightJohnson#Spe...] There's a link to the source that was copied, [http://www.osa.org/en-us/about_osa/leadership_and_volunteers/officers/strickland/ http://www.osa.org/en-us/about_osa/leadership_and_volunteers...]. That leads to a 404, but in the Wayback Machine, I found this on Dr. Strickland: [https://web.archive.org/web/20130426010318/http://www.osa.org/about_osa/leadership_and_volunteers/officers/president/ https://web.archive.org/web/20130426010318/http://www.osa.or...] And the second paragraph is a word for word copy of the summary from the first edit in the history of the page, "Created page with ''''Donna Strickland''' is a past president of the Optical Society. She has worked on several committees within the OSA. She has been on the editorial board of O...'" [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Donna_Strickland&dir=prev&action=history https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Donna_Strickland&...]

tptacek 5y ago

Are we looking at different things? I just wrote a whole long comment on this after poking around on WP about it, and I'd be glad to know if I got things completely scrambled. Because what I see is a page created in 2018, and a _lot_ of intra-WP coverage of the process that led to there not being a page before 2018, all of which squares with what this article says.

jessaustin 5y ago
I'm probably misunderstanding something, but I do see some 2014 dates at the bottom of the page linked above. ISTM wikipedia was informed of this scientist in some fashion in 2014, and those contributions were deleted or set aside or whatever. I'm happy to be educated on this, but at least we can say that the process is obscure. Of course the point is that GP's whinging about headlines is silly. Her Nobel paper was published in 1985.
- tptacek 5y ago
  You're right, I missed the stub from 2014. It was speedy-deleted for copyright infringement.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]

mjw1007 5y ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=Donna+Strickland https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=... says that the 2014 version was deleted as "Unambiguous copyright infringement". That will be why those revisions are no longer accessible.

jessaustin 5y ago
That would be a valid justification in general, but I'm curious in this particular case. Was this an infringement of another encyclopedia? Perhaps that publication could have been identified in the deletion note? Maybe even cited in the page itself? Basic facts about a human (birthdate, alma mater, publications, etc.) are not subject to copyright anyway, so a long flowery essay about the scientist could have been edited to the bare essentials. However, I suspect no such long flowery essay actually existed in 2014. After all, Strickland was a woman who hadn't won the Nobel. Of course these questions are unanswerable due to the specific type of the deletion. Curious.
- mgbennet 5y ago
  It's perfectly possible to find the source of the infringement with a little investigation. The user who created the page has a comment on their talk page notifying them that Donna Strickland page has been nominated for deletion due to "unambiguous copyright deletion". [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:SteplightJohnson#Speedy_deletion_nomination_of_Donna_Strickland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:SteplightJohnson#Spe...] There's a link to the source that was copied, [http://www.osa.org/en-us/about_osa/leadership_and_volunteers/officers/strickland/ http://www.osa.org/en-us/about_osa/leadership_and_volunteers...]. That leads to a 404, but in the Wayback Machine, I found this on Dr. Strickland: [https://web.archive.org/web/20130426010318/http://www.osa.org/about_osa/leadership_and_volunteers/officers/president/ https://web.archive.org/web/20130426010318/http://www.osa.or...] And the second paragraph is a word for word copy of the summary from the first edit in the history of the page, "Created page with ''''Donna Strickland''' is a past president of the Optical Society. She has worked on several committees within the OSA. She has been on the editorial board of O...'" [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Donna_Strickland&dir=prev&action=history https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Donna_Strickland&...]