This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
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 articles
Stanley E. Trauth is part of WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles, an effort to make Wikipedia a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource for amphibians and reptiles. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.Amphibians and ReptilesWikipedia:WikiProject Amphibians and ReptilesTemplate:WikiProject Amphibians and Reptilesamphibian and reptile articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
Assistance for finding third-party sources about the subject, not just by him or his employer.--Animalparty-- (talk) 03:36, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The article contains lots of fluff and inflated claims, so much so that it is impossible to see whether this person actually is notable. Instead of concentrating on his academic "genealogy", which does not contribute anything to notability, it would be better to concentrate on finding reliable sources about real accomplishments of this person. --Randykitty (talk) 21:43, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If someone's name appears in a list of "notable XXX" produced by the leading expert on XX, then I would suggest taht when I cite taht list, taht it is actually an opinoin of merit. Academci genealogy IS something that contributes to merity. It is how a person ends up who they are. This is standard practice to identify an academic. Sorry you have not been informed of this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Herpetology2 (talk • contribs) 00:14, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No, genealogy is perhaps important for royalty, but not for academics and it does not add anything to notability. Please see WP:NOTINHERITED, WP:ANYBIO, WP:GNG, and WP:ACADEMIC. Adding stuff like "John Doe did his PhD with Important Scientist, who did his PhD with Big Scientist who won the Important Award" is just name dropping. "Important Scientist" is clearly relevant as the direct thesis supervisor. "Big Scientist" and "Important Award" just give the impression that this has anything to do with "John Doe", but it hasn't, of course. --Randykitty (talk) 08:45, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I note that all edits I did yesterday have been reverted wholesale. This includes standard edits to make the article WP:MOS compliant, re-addition of peacock terms, incorrect capitalization of names, trivial stuff (like OR about numbers of publications), use of unreliable sources such as IMDb and WP, etc, etc. There are also several inappropriate in-text external links. The category "American zoologists" was added again, even though "American herpetologists" is a subcat of that one, so it isn't needed. Several references fail verification. For example, Mehaka's GS profile does not mention Trauth. I note that Trauth's own GS profile (see here) is not mentioned in the article and is not indicative of much notability. This was the last, relatively clean version of the article. --Randykitty (talk) 08:58, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
