Talk:Jim May (chemical engineer)

This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:

Withdrawn by Nominator, 1 October 2023, see discussion.
keep, 2 January 2023, see discussion.

Australia Low‑importance

	Australia portal Jim May (chemical engineer) is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

A proposal to change the name of the article from James Richard May to Jim May (chemical engineer)

A proposal to change the name of the article from James Richard May to Jim May (chemical engineer) would be more fitting and accurate of what this person did. Carey3146 (talk) 09:49, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support this article name change. Carey3146 (talk) 09:49, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Tone and lack of citations

I have just been through this paean of praise and flagged it for the required citations. It was retained at AfD, but requires significant work. It looks like an obituary written before the gentleman's death. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 08:25, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

This article needs some work regarding how the references are cited. There are many repeats of the same source that requires to be formatted properly. Some help is required in this. Anyone able to do this? Thanks Carey3146 (talk) 06:54, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what the general consensus for the applicability of BLP, so I'm not going to assume it does at this point. I wouldn't be against anyone saying it applies, and using that as justification to remove all poor references and associated content.

Regardless:

Who's Who should be removed.

alumni.uq.edu.au, all death notices and obituaries should be removed or treated as a self-published, promotional sources. That makes up most of the references. The redundancy among them is inappropriate. It looks like some may be duplicate articles with different publishers. All redundant and duplicate references should be removed.

There are a number of references that have less than minimal information about them (eg "Curriculum Vitae", "Jim's Professional Story"), making it unclear if or how they should be used. In many cases they are redundant, and they should be removed in those cases.

I'm not finding a good version to refer to. The article had large amounts of unverified content prior to his death that should have been removed. --Hipal (talk) 18:38, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In response to what you believe should be removed:

I believe that Who’s Who has a page number that references Jim May, thus a non-primary source.

Secondly, the University of Queensland source was written by UQ, not Jim May.

Thirdly, the death notices were also edited by the newspapers themselves, as nothing can be published without it being proofed.

However, I do agree, that the photograph references should be removed as they are unverifiable. Nevertheless, the other sources should be kept as they make direct, non-primary references to Jim May.

Thanks. Carey3146 (talk) 00:24, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Things which have page numbers are by no means always reliable. The Reader's Digest has page numbers.

Editorial overview of death notices is scant. They tend to be paid adverts. I have removed the regurgitated death notices (whcih, were only passing mentions anyway) and retained the memorial service, which has meat 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:19, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Age and the Sydney Morning Herald article are identical, and the SMH and The Age share selected items. The "articles"are a user generated Obit by Richard May, presumed son of Jim May. It is disingenuous to use both, so I am compressing them to be only one. It appears that The Age is likely the "better" paper 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 20:50, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Doubly disingenuous to use the identical, references to cite the precise same point. That is corrected. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:01, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There are many highly suspect references. At least one (removed) is not about May. Others fail to verify the fact they have been used to cite. I have removed and am continuing to remove uncited elements of text and/or spurious references. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 22:33, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Do you know why references 1 and 2 are both unreliable or unverifiable? Thanks. Carey3146 (talk) 23:59, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Reference 1 (currently) is "Pearce, Suzannah (2005). Who's Who in Australia, 1906-2006, XLII Edition. Crown Content Pty Ltd. p. 1350. ISBN 1740950232" and there is debate about any Who's Who having reliability.

Reference 2 (currently) is "James May". Alumni and Community. The University of Queensland. 8 January 2016.". I will deal with that in a separate bullet point 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 08:05, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It may be a useful to take this to BLPN, where a decision can be made if BLP still applies here. --Hipal (talk) 01:22, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The death is very recent, thus I am certain that it is covered by the requirement to be referenced completely. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 08:02, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The reference currently at #2 is "James May". Alumni and Community. The University of Queensland. 8 January 2016." I have a concern about this.

Source assessment table
Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Count source toward GNG?

James May". Alumni and Community. The University of Queensland. 8 January 2016. ~ This is a university giving an award to one of their own alumni. It is a useful marketing vehicle for the university There is much marketing and PR self interest when making some form of an award to an alumnus. While the University itself may be considered reliable, the Alumni element of it is by no means likely to be in this context Several paragraphs. ✘ No

This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

While this is my opinion, my intent is to open it up to discussion. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 08:15, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your concerns, however, May was not an alumni of UQ, he received an honorary doctorate due to his work, that was based on an association with UQ, but he did not graduate from the university. Carey3146 (talk) 08:51, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That grants all the more emphasis to its marketing function. This, too, is the highlight of words allegedly to convince the body to award the "thing". I contend that this is a reference that does not have GNG value, and that it need to be replaced with once satisfying WP:42 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 10:42, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have performed a full analysis of 100% of all current references:

Source assessment table prepared by User:Timtrent
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Pearce, Suzannah (2005). Who's Who in Australia, 1906-2006, XLII Edition. Crown Content Pty Ltd. p. 1350. ISBN 1740950232.	~ There is significant doubt about the independence of any edition of Who's Who	~ There is significant doubt about the reliability of any edition of Who's Who	No copy was available to assess	? Unknown
James May". Alumni and Community. The University of Queensland. 8 January 2016.	~ This is a university giving an award to one of their own alumni. It is a useful marketing vehicle for the university	There is much marketing and PR self interest when making some form of an award to an alumnus. While the University itself may be considered reliable, the Alumni element of it is by no means likely to be in this context	Several paragraphs.	✘ No
Field, Graham J. (1988). The Fields of Endeavour, Builders, Butchers and Publicans. G. Field. p. 115. ISBN 978-0-7316-4614-2.	No copy was available to assess	No copy was available to assess	No copy was available to assess	? Unknown
Evans, Mervyn Wyke (1981). The Days of May. Rigby. pp. 302, 303. ISBN 978-0-7270-1548-8.	No copy was available to assess	No copy was available to assess	No copy was available to assess	? Unknown
May, Richard. “Outstanding Contribution Advanced Mineral Research and Technology.” The Age. The Age, August 26, 2023. https://www.theage.com.au/national/outstanding-contribution-advanced-mineral-research-and-technology-20230826-p5dzn2.html.	While The Age is independent and RS, the Obits segment is user generated submissions. This is authored by May's son.	While The Age is independent and RS, the Obits segment is user generated submissions. This is authored by May's son.	Decent article	✘ No
“A Service of Thanksgiving and Celebration for the Life Of.” Accessed June 15, 2023. https://irp.cdn-website.com/6d856cf0/files/uploaded/James%20May%20OOS.pdf	The is an order of service for a funeral/thanksgiving service	The is an order of service for a funeral/thanksgiving service	Well fleshed out order of service	✘ No
Sense, Design. “Australian Prospectors & Miners Hall of Fame	This states it uses "AMIRA International Archives" and AMIRA is where May was CEO for many years	This states it uses "AMIRA International Archives" and AMIRA is where May was CEO for many years	Well rounded piece	✘ No
AusIMM Award recipients 2021". AusIMM.	Profile piece of May among other members of this institute	Profile piece of May among other members of this institute	Well rounded piece<	✘ No
issuu. "AMIRA Sharing the Benefits Newsletter – Issue 38 November 2014," 2014. p. 13. https://issuu.com/imranhussain94/docs/amira_-_sharing_the_benefits_-_issu/1?ff	AMIRA newsletter! May was CEO	AMIRA newsletter! May was CEO<	Passing mention in the caption to a photograph om p18	✘ No
"Centenary Medal entry for Mr James Richard MAY". It's an Honour, Australian Honours Database. Canberra, Australia: Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. 1 January 2001. Retrieved 2 January 2023. For service to Australian society in mineral science and engineering	Australian government document	Australian government document	Sufficient to cite the award satisfactorily	✔ Yes
The AusIMM Awards Recipients" (PDF). Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy. p. 6. Retrieved 2 January 2023. in recognition of his outstanding contribution to the initiation and management of mineral research and technology through his role as Chief Executive Officer of the Australian Mineral Industries Research Association (AMIRA) and involvement with research organisations throughout Australia.	Awards given by this institute	Awards given by this institute	One paragraph, top of page 6	✘ No
ATSE. “All Fellows	Part of list of all fellows of this organisation	Part of list of all fellows of this organisation	Verifies membership and death date in almost no words	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

This shows me that May has not been demonstrated to be notable. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 13:05, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Based upon this I have sent it for discussion to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jim May (chemical engineer) where all opinions are welcomed. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 13:12, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is a slightly updated version of this table at the deletion discussion. The update suggests that the Centenary Medal confers little, if anything, in the way of notability, since it was awarded to over 15,000 Australians.

I do not intend to update this local version. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 15:33, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Awards section

Remove memberships, unless independent references clearly demonstrate mention is due, in which case move them out of the section. Consider removing any award if it doesn't meet same conditions. Move honorary degrees out of the section. That should leave a section with major awards that are clearly due such emphasis. --Hipal (talk) 01:31, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Where would you move the honorary degrees to? Carey3146 (talk) 01:44, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I believe that all the awards have independent references, so it’s only the honorary degrees that need to be discussed from my perspective. Carey3146 (talk) 01:46, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fellowship of an Institution where that fellowship may be bought with a membership fee or an enhanced membership fee is a vanity membership. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 07:24, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

From my understanding, the membership is bought, but the honorary fellowship and fellowship from AusIMM and ATSE are awards based upon merit, not on financial contributions. Carey3146 (talk) 08:49, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I was, once, a Fellow of the Institute of Sales and Marketing Management. It was a paid grade of membership, with sole qualifying criterion of length of membership. Fellowship is not automatically notable 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 10:44, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am not going to pass judgment on your institute that you were a part of. However, from my understanding, the two fellowships from this article are and were determined by merit and in the particular fields it encompasses, not necessarily financial contributions, nor length of time. After all, May was not a member prior to his fellowship of the ATSE. This suggests alone that he was awarded a fellowship of the ATSE and indeed AusIMM as well almost exclusively on his merit, rather than financial funds, or his length of membership. After all, if we look at other fellows, almost all of them were very notable in their own right based upon their merit and contributions. Carey3146 (talk) 11:47, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All the more reason to have significant coverage in independent reliable sources about the events. If it as significant, as you stare, then it must be recorded somewhat substantially. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 12:10, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Hipal I've sifted these into individual subsections, the better to consider them 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 07:31, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

COI tag (October 2023)

See WP:COIN Melcous (talk) 22:45, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New references found

Hello, I am fully aware of my COI, however, I thought it could be possible for another editor to potentially include these references that I have found of the article:

1. Burgin, Robert (2021). "THE NEXT MOVE: 50 Years of the JKMCR" (PDF). The University of Queensland. pp. 13, 14, 15. Retrieved 5 February 2024.

2. "Past Honorary Awards Recipients". The University of South Australia. 2023. Retrieved 5 February 2024.

3. "May, James Richard (1934 - 2023)". Encyclopaedia of Australian Science and Innovation. Swinburne University of Technology. 22 November 2023. Retrieved 5 February 2024.

I have no intention whatsoever to overstep the mark regarding my COI, so I would very much appreciate this being enacted if an editor wishes to do so. Thanks again, Carey3146 (talk) 06:02, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These references provided seem legit and I will honour Carey3146’s wish not because of their past record but because of the necessity to fix up the missing evidence in this article. I expect Carey3146 to still adhere to the their COI. Fxmachine3x (talk) 21:42, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]