University of California Unassessed

This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to University of California, its history, accomplishments and other topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.University of CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject University of CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject University of CaliforniaUniversity of California ??? This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Biography: Science and Academia Start‑class

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 Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. This article is supported by the science and academia work group.

Physics Start‑class High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

	Barack Obama (inactive)
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Barack Obama, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Barack ObamaWikipedia:WikiProject Barack ObamaTemplate:WikiProject Barack ObamaBarack Obama

Template:Energy portal news /archive

This article is really pretty well referenced. We might be able to make a GA push for it. Though if we do, we might want to wait till after he's actually confirmed as Energy Secretary to submit the GA nomination. Between now and the confirmation, I do think journalists will be digging into his past and who knows if anything controversial might surface. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 21:44, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In the Personal Life section:

Chu was the keynote speaker for Boston University's commencement ceremony on May 20, 2007. He is an early signatory to Project Steve, an educational campaign supporting the conventional scientific understanding of evolution.

Does this really deserve mention in the article? He's probably been a speaker in many many engagements, being a Nobel Prize winner. And he's probably a signatory to a lot of things. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 16:28, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Probably not. I moved it to the {{Section link}}: required section parameter(s) missing section before I noticed your message here, but I wouldn't mind if it were deleted. — Sebastian 07:52, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Does anybody have any objection to removal? Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 12:41, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's probably worth keeping Project Steve somewhere. Voluntarily taking a stand for evolution teaching is relevant to his new career in government. Certainly the science blogosphere went happy-crazy over a Project Steve signatory in the US cabinet. A Geek Tragedy (talk) 17:56, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. I removed the commencement ceremony, but kept the Project Steve. (I kept it in the {{Section link}}: required section parameter(s) missing section, not because it has to do with either, but because that section is basically the section for "Other stuff he did that has some bearing to his new career in government".) — Sebastian 19:32, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have his senior picture from undergrad. Would that be of any use for this page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Benjeye (talk • contribs) 01:25, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm cutting down coverage of details of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, the Energy Biosciences Institute, the Bio-X program/James H. Clark Center, and the Kavli Institute for Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology, because these are not specifically connected with Steven Chu. — Sebastian 04:46, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I find SebastianHelm's modifications somewhat disingenuous. While he stated he'd like to keep information related to other institutions on other sites, he reincorporated the incorrect statement regarding who voiced which concerns about the EBI. The truth is that many people - not just faculty - have voiced concerns, and about more than just 'selling out' as SebastianHelm modified the text to read. I am reinstating these.

Furthermore, I do not see the harm in including a few more words here and there. But if we are going to keep as little information as possible about other institutions in this page, then there is still more cutting to be done. 5p0gSp (talk) 05:49, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are right that my modifications were not perfect, and I admit that they were indeed motivated by cutting back some of your edits. We have an ethical and legal responsibility to write such articles about living persons with the greatest care and attention to neutrality. While I appreciate the contributions of a knowledgeable editor such as you, your edits unfortunately didn’t meet this requirement. After your recent edits, the article was devoid of any mention of his role in establishing and funding the Kavli Institute, and, at the same time, criticism of another project is overstated and covered in several sentences.

The deletion of the Kavli Institute sentence was hardly justifiable. With your interest in Steven Chu, there’s no reason why you could not simply enter “Steven Chu Kavli Institute” in your search engine and confirm the sentence with reliable sources like this. And with your knowledge of the need to adhere to references, you should be aware that writing “This has drawn controversy with a wide range of people”, does not confirm to our policies when none of your four references actually mentions “a wide range of people”. That said, I agree with you that the wording “some of Berkeley's faculty”, which I reincorporated, was not adequate either. I will edit the article accordingly. You now claim there are “many people”. Could you give a reliable source with an estimate of how many there are?

Because I made mistakes myself in this, and because, above all, we seem to share some core values, such as care for the environment, consumer protection and transparency of public institutions, I will not take the usual path of officially warning you. I prefer to first engage with people in an open, personal dialog. Please respect this as well as our policies, particularly the admonition to write for the enemy. If we can meet at this common ground, then I’m sure we will have a good cooperation ahead. — Sebastian 21:43, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

I am Steven's second cousin - our grandfathers were brothers. Relationships in Steven Chu's lineage were incorrect. The work cited is in error, it should perhaps have used the word "maternal" rather than "mother's".

This wording was: "His mother's grandfather earned advanced civil engineering degrees at Cornell University and his mother's granduncle studied physics at the Sorbonne before they returned to China."[2]

The correct relationship is: "His mother's father earned advanced civil engineering degrees at Cornell University and his mother's uncle studied physics at the Sorbonne before they returned to China."[2]

His mother's uncle was http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Li_Shu-hua —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.6.111.225 (talk) 17:28, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pauline —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.6.111.225 (talk) 17:17, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Pauline!

Thank you for your patience and your explanation! You are absolutely right! I just misread the source. 真不好意思！ What was I thinking when I reverted your first correction?! — Sebastian 04:19, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]