Misplaced Pages

Talk:Ruggero Santilli: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 19:19, 22 October 2020 editSineBot (talk | contribs)Bots2,556,605 editsm Signing comment by Jolli321 - "→Recommended updates: new section"← Previous edit Latest revision as of 08:36, 17 November 2024 edit undoCewbot (talk | contribs)Bots8,041,169 editsm Maintain {{WPBS}}: 4 WikiProject templates. (Fix Category:Pages with redundant living parameter)Tag: Talk banner shell conversion 
(18 intermediate revisions by 10 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Talk header}}
{{COI editnotice}}
{{Calm}}
{{Old AfD multi|date=8 March 2007|result='''keep'''|page=Ruggero_Santilli|date2=22 August 2016|result2='''no consensus'''|page2=Ruggero Santilli (2nd nomination)}} {{Old AfD multi|date=8 March 2007|result='''keep'''|page=Ruggero_Santilli|date2=22 August 2016|result2='''no consensus'''|page2=Ruggero Santilli (2nd nomination)}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|blp=yes|class=Start|listas=Santilli, Ruggero Maria|1=
{{talk header}}
{{WikiProject Biography|needs-photo=yes|s&a-work-group=yes}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
{{WikiProject Physics|importance=low|bio=yes}}
|archiveheader = {{talk archive navigation}}
{{WikiProject Alternative views|importance=Low}}
|maxarchivesize = 70K
{{WikiProject Chemistry|importance=low}}
|counter = 4
|minthreadsleft = 1
|minthreadstoarchive = 1
|algo = old(100d)
|archive = Talk:Ruggero Santilli/Archive %(counter)d
}}
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|blp=yes|1=
{{WikiProject Biography
|living=yes
|class=Start
|needs-photo=yes
|s&a-work-group=yes
|listas=Santilli, Ruggero Maria
}}
{{WikiProject Physics|class=start|importance=low|bio=yes}}
{{WikiProject Alternative Views|class=Start|importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject Chemistry|class=start|importance=low}}
}} }}
{{Connected contributor
{{merged|Magnecule}}
{{cool talk}}
{{Connected contributor
| User1 =Da cosenza | U1-EH =yes | U1-banned = | U1-otherlinks = Promotional SPA Per ] | User1 =Da cosenza | U1-EH =yes | U1-banned = | U1-otherlinks = Promotional SPA Per ]
| User2 =SantilliGalilei | U2-EH = yes | U2-banned = | U2-otherlinks =Promotional SPA per ] | User2 =SantilliGalilei | U2-EH = yes | U2-banned = | U2-otherlinks =Promotional SPA per ]
Line 36: Line 21:
| User10 = 98.251.106.167| U10-EH = yes | U10-banned = | U10-otherlinks = Promotional SPA per ] | User10 = 98.251.106.167| U10-EH = yes | U10-banned = | U10-otherlinks = Promotional SPA per ]
}} }}
{{Connected contributor {{Connected contributor
| User1 =Bravescience | U1-EH =yes | U1-banned = | U1-otherlinks = Promotional SPA Per ] | User1 =Bravescience | U1-EH =yes | U1-banned = | U1-otherlinks = Promotional SPA Per ]
| User2 =Superbopper | U2-EH = yes | U2-banned = | U2-otherlinks =Promotional SPA per] | User2 =Superbopper | U2-EH = yes | U2-banned = | U2-otherlinks =Promotional SPA per]
Line 48: Line 33:
| User10 =Reussi | U10-EH = yes | U10-banned = yes | U10-otherlinks = Sock of Kaufman1111. Promotional SPA per ] | User10 =Reussi | U10-EH = yes | U10-banned = yes | U10-otherlinks = Sock of Kaufman1111. Promotional SPA per ]
}} }}
{{Connected contributor {{Connected contributor
| User1 = Verderosso | U1-EH =yes | U1-banned =yes | U1-otherlinks = Sock of Kaufman1111. Promotional SPA Per ] | User1 = Verderosso | U1-EH =yes | U1-banned =yes | U1-otherlinks = Sock of Kaufman1111. Promotional SPA Per ]
| User2 = Scuranova | U2-EH = yes | U2-banned = yes | U2-otherlinks =Sock of Kaufman1111. Promotional SPA per ] | User2 = Scuranova | U2-EH = yes | U2-banned = yes | U2-otherlinks =Sock of Kaufman1111. Promotional SPA per ]
Line 58: Line 43:
| User8 = 71.180.120.18 | U8-EH = yes | U8-banned = | U8-otherlinks = Promotional SPA per ] | User8 = 71.180.120.18 | U8-EH = yes | U8-banned = | U8-otherlinks = Promotional SPA per ]
| User9 = 70.125.25.14| U9-EH = yes | U9-banned = | U9-otherlinks = Promotional SPA per ] | User9 = 70.125.25.14| U9-EH = yes | U9-banned = | U9-otherlinks = Promotional SPA per ]
| User10 = ScientificEthics| U10-EH = yes | U10-banned = yes | U10-otherlinks = Blocked for hate speech at ]. ] | User10 = ScientificEthics| U10-EH = yes | U10-banned = yes | U10-otherlinks = Blocked for hate speech at ]. Promotional SPA per ]
}} }}
{{Connected contributor {{Connected contributor
| User1 = 70.125.25.14 | U1-EH =yes | U1-banned = | U1-otherlinks = Promotional SPA Per ] | User1 = 70.125.25.14 | U1-EH =yes | U1-banned = | U1-otherlinks = Promotional SPA Per ]
| User2 = Aabrucadubraa | U2-EH = yes | U2-banned = yes | U2-otherlinks =Indeffed per ]. Promotional SPA per ] | User2 = Aabrucadubraa | U2-EH = yes | U2-banned = yes | U2-otherlinks =Indeffed per ]. Promotional SPA per ]
Line 72: Line 57:
| User10 = Vespro Latuna| U10-EH = yes | U10-banned = | U10-otherlinks = Promotional near-SPA per ] | User10 = Vespro Latuna| U10-EH = yes | U10-banned = | U10-otherlinks = Promotional near-SPA per ]
}} }}
{{Connected contributor {{Connected contributor
| User1 = Truthfulperspective | U1-EH =yes | U1-banned = | U1-otherlinks = Promotional SPA Per ] | User1 = Truthfulperspective | U1-EH =yes | U1-banned = | U1-otherlinks = Promotional SPA Per ]
| User2 =188.206.104.1 | U2-EH = yes | U2-banned = yes | U2-otherlinks =Promotional SPA per ] | User2 =188.206.104.1 | U2-EH = yes | U2-banned = yes | U2-otherlinks =Promotional SPA per ]
Line 96: Line 81:
| User10 = | U10-employer = | U10-client = | U10-EH = | U10-banned = | U10-otherlinks = | User10 = | U10-employer = | U10-client = | U10-EH = | U10-banned = | U10-otherlinks =
}} }}
{{Merged-from|Magnecule}}
{{COI editnotice}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{talk archive navigation}}
|maxarchivesize = 70K
|counter = 4
|minthreadsleft = 1
|minthreadstoarchive = 1
|algo = old(100d)
|archive = Talk:Ruggero Santilli/Archive %(counter)d
}}


__TOC__ __TOC__

== Back to the banned book ==
{{hat|Sock puppet initiated discussion}}
<s>Sorry but not sorry for bringing this up again as I feel that instances where an author’s book was banned are an essential mention for the BLP of that author. In ] case, we have a former Harvard scientist, once under funding by the Department of Energy (a sourced fact previously removed from the article for some reason unknown to me), who published a book alleging suppression of his scientific work. Then his book documenting this alleged suppression is then banned from Harvard area book stores. How does this BLP only include the first part about the book being published and the allegations against Nobel Prizes winning scientists, but then totally glosses over the second part about how it was banned? For any editors new to this talk, the ‘second part’ I am recommending be included about the banning of the book is from the exact same source already used as a ref for the ‘first part’.
The reference I am <ref name=crimson>https://www.thecrimson.com/article/1985/3/20/the-politics-of-science-pbmbost-ameficans/</ref> is an article that appeared in the Harvard Crimson. Here is ending of the article which mentions the ban.


''“It would be easy to dismiss Santilli's claims as the dissatisfied grumblings of a misguided physicist, but his story is too well documented and his charges too serious. While Santilli might have aroused personal opposition in the physics community, the events he relates are too glaring to be attributed to mere personality conflicts. His case is compelling and deserves to be heard--that it has been suppressed so far is undeniable.You may find it difficult to find II Grande Grido in Cambridge. According to the book's publisher, several area bookstores have refused to carry Santilli's book for fear of alienating their Harvard customers. It would be a shame if after all his efforts. Santilli's case were never heard. However, the book can be purchased at the I.B.R. at 98 Prescott St. in Cambridge. If Santilli is right, it is a place a lot more people should be visiting.”'' <ref name=crimson></ref>

Pardon me, but it is almost as if the editors here over the years have intentionally suppressed any fact, no matter how well sourced and/or relevant that might not make Santilli come across like a complete “crackpot”. Does mentioning that his book was banned afford Santilli some credibility to his case?
Maybe it does maybe it doesn’t. But that is not our job. We cite what the sources say and nothing more.
I am putting mention of the ban back into the article. If anyone has a compelling reason why it should continued to be suppressed, please make it here. I promise I will revert it out myself if anyone can produce a rationale case.] (]) 05:22, 9 December 2018 (UTC)DCsghost</s>
:A student newspaper is not a good source for this sort of material. As we have agreed over and over already. —] (]) 06:24, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

<s>::So the Harvard Crimson is suddenly not a good source or just not a good source for “this sort of material”? What: ”sort of material” is that? So your case is that the Crimson is a good source of material for the part about a scientist leveling crazy sounding allegations of misconduct against two Noble Laurates, but falls into total unreliability in regards to the really important “sort of material” like whether or not a student can find a particular book in a bookstore around campus?
::And no, we have not agreed “over and over” let alone once on any of this. If someone else agreed with you on this please provide me a link/source. I found an older comment from you on the same topic back then you somehow tried to argue that the reporter must have been in his sophomore at the time of writing (are you implying only juniors and seniors know where the bookstores are?) and thus “should not be taken seriously as a reliable source about a scientific issue?” Nobody agreed with you

::And what scientific issue is that? A bookstore carrying a book or not is NOT a scientific issue by any stretch, particularly because this is BLP which is not some “scientific issue”.

::I will ask you for the 3rd time, have you been editing this article all this time in bad faith?

::Here is a compromise, it goes back in but instead of using the term “ban”, I will just stick with what the source stated. “Several area bookstores have refused to carry Santilli's book for fear of alienating their Harvard customers”] (]) 07:45, 9 December 2018 (UTC)DCsghost</s>
:::Your suggested text and the student-newspaper story both credit this story to "the publisher", Alpha Publishing of Newtonville MA. As far as I can tell that publisher has only published books by Santilli (there are other Alpha Publishing companies from which it should be distinguished). Do we have any evidence that Alpha Publishing is in any way distinct from Santilli himself? —] (]) 08:07, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
::: What David said. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 09:40, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
::::Not much question about it. A Google search on "Alpha Publishing" Newtonville -Santilli shows up and 1890s company, nothing suggesting it exists today outside of Santilli. ] ] 13:45, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

<s>:::::The argument that The Harvard Crimson is not a reliable source because it is a “student newspaper” fails since the source has already been deemed valid by all editors involved in this discussion and is has been used for years as a valid source of a large portion of the article. Do we now go back and remove all parts about Santilli’s allegations against Prof Weinberg since the source was just a “student newspaper”?

:::::I see the last time someone tried to remove edits sourced by the “student newspaper” David Eppstein immediately reverted adding this comment.

:::::''Revision as of 21:39, 4 June 2014 (edit) (undo) David Eppstein (talk | contribs) (Undo whitewash of Santilli's toxic views)''

:::::Apparently questioning the ethics of someone in power is a “toxic view”? David Eppstein have you been editing in good faith?

:::::So now we are left with this objection/unfounded conspiracy theory of a bias editor which in my opinion are not acting in good faith, ''“Do we have any evidence that Alpha Publishing is in any way distinct from Santilli himself?”'' So, do we have any evidence that Alpha Publishing is any way distinct from Donald Trump himself? This is just nonsense. We are not here to hatch conspiracy theories and edit based upon want we want to believe. Unless someone can produce a verifiable source that states explicitly the book publisher cannot be trusted to know which bookstores wouldn’t carry the book, you have nothing.

:::::Editors here refuse to accept that the Hadronic Journal (founded by Santilli while at Harvard under support from the DOE) existed outside of Santilli’s “vanity press” even though I can show of well establish mainstream scientists like ] who published papers in the Hadronic Journal.

:::::The cherry-picking by editors here is truly unbelievable. For example, Santilli was labeled here as “pseudoscience” (which later morphed into “fringe scientist”) with zero source or reference for over 3 years; until Doug Weller finally stepped up and used a self-quotation from Santilli to justify that label.

:::::''(cur | prev) 15:10, 3 February 2011‎ Doug Weller (talk | contribs)‎ . . (17,517 bytes) +322‎ . . (I agree, this needs to be sourced, it's Santilli himself who is the source in this case) (undo)''

:::::So if I provided a good source to Santilli saying that his book was banned, do we get to use that then? Or is he not to be quoted on things editors don’t want to believe? Even worse, that self-quotation has been twisted into a clear misrepresentation. This is the exactly what Santilli told the reporter.

:::::''"You call the famous professor and the famous professor will say, 'Oh, Professor Santilli is a weirdo. His science is not accepted by the establishment, ' " Santilli said.''

:::::To stretch that into justification for a derogatory label like "pseudoscientist", which again was applied to him for 3 years without even an attempt at a citation, borders on misconduct in my opinion. Here is one example of how that source does not support what the article says.

:::::"He told the reporter from St. Petersburg Times that the scientific establishment has not accepted this work."

:::::No, he told the reporter that if you called the “famous professor” that is what this famous professor would tell you. That needs to be changed. Is Santilli’s science currently accepted by the scientific establishment? I would say most likely not (particularly if any established scientist read this slanted article on him), but what I say doesn’t matter. Misplaced Pages isn’t about writing what we just know must be true, it’s about citing valid references. Find one or remove it, this is a BLP.

:::::My interest in this article is improving it. This is in my opinion one of the most clear cut examples of bad faith editing by a group of senior wikipedians I have ever seen. I am going to focus on improving this article further and welcome the dialogue we are having here even though I clearly disagree with the validity of the arguments I have seen here so far. ] (]) 19:53, 9 December 2018 (UTC)DCsghost</s>

::::::The source does not say the book was banned, why is "banned" even being discussed? ] ] 20:10, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
:::::::Indeed, it's very unsurprising that a self-published and fringe book had difficulty getting distributed to bookstores. So I don't see why conspiracy theories of a "ban" need to be invented. And certainly a student newspaper uncritically reporting Santilli's own theories are not adequate sources for this material. —] (]) 21:44, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
{{reflist-talk}}
{{hab}}


== Recommended updates == == Recommended updates ==
Line 187: Line 123:
mathematical, physical and chemical papers published in refereed journals in which Santilli is not an editor, which papers are essential for the understanding of the apparent EPR verifications. mathematical, physical and chemical papers published in refereed journals in which Santilli is not an editor, which papers are essential for the understanding of the apparent EPR verifications.


In closing allow me to recommend that the article be completed wiuth a section entitled "Research" since all visitors are expecting news on Santilli's apparent verifications of the EPR argument, while now there is none. I can draft this section, but I would need access to the References. Thank you. Jolli321 <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 19:18, 22 October 2020 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> In closing allow me to recommend that the article be completed wiuth a section entitled "Research" since all visitors are expecting news on Santilli's apparent verifications of the EPR argument, while now there is none. I can draft this section, but I would need access to the References. Thank you. Jolli321 <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 19:18, 22 October 2020. NOTE: My above specified editing of Santilli's 'article' was removed by David Epstein in about three minutes following its posting. (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

Can please some more administrative persons who can decide have a look at the above proposed change. I find the page insulting, too, so it should be overworked. Till Meyenburg <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 16:43, 4 April 2023 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

Agreed. This page needs an unbiased administrative review in the interest of Misplaced Pages standing and its role of information vehicle. It is now evident that nobody has been and is allowed to make changes or additions in order to make a fair representation of the contributions of Prof, Santilli who, at age 87, keeps working and publishing in peer-reviewed journals such as Ratio Mathematica 1)<ref>https://eiris.it/ojs/index.php/ratiomathematica/article/view/477</ref> and Springer Nature Scientific Reports 2) <ref>Sci Rep 12 , 20674 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-24970-4</ref>on subjects that, everybody can see, are vital to science and therefore society .The focus of this Misplaced Pages article is on events presented in negative light only that occurred almost 10 years ago. His recent article published by Nature and his work on the EPR argument point out to new horizons that lead to possible solutions to the crisis of our environment. By looking at the editing history the page, it is evident that nobody has been able to add this information to Prof. Santilli's page because Misplaced Pages remains stubbornly stuck on the defamation campaign fueled years ago by bloggers and stock market profiteers. Misplaced Pages is the loser here. ] (]) 21:59, 23 June 2023 (UTC)Tom Yeager] (])

{{reflist-talk}}

Latest revision as of 08:36, 17 November 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ruggero Santilli article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4Auto-archiving period: 3 months 
Individuals with a conflict of interest, particularly those representing the subject of the article, are strongly advised not to directly edit the article. See Misplaced Pages:Conflict of interest. You may request corrections or suggest content here on the Talk page for independent editors to review, or contact us if the issue is urgent.
Peace dove with olive branch in its beakPlease stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute.
Articles for deletionThis article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
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 sourced must 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 Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconBiography: Science and Academia
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages'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
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the science and academia work group.
Note icon
An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.
WikiProject iconPhysics: Biographies Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Misplaced Pages. 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
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
This article is supported by Biographies Taskforce.
[REDACTED] Alternative views Low‑importance
[REDACTED] This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative views, a collaborative effort to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of significant alternative views in every field, from the sciences to the humanities. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion.Alternative viewsWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative viewsTemplate:WikiProject Alternative viewsAlternative views
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconChemistry Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemistry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of chemistry on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChemistryWikipedia:WikiProject ChemistryTemplate:WikiProject ChemistryChemistry
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
The following Misplaced Pages contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.
The following Misplaced Pages contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.
The following Misplaced Pages contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.
The following Misplaced Pages contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.
The following Misplaced Pages contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.
The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE.
The contents of the Magnecule page were merged into Ruggero Santilli. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page.

Recommended updates

Editor Dough Weller, I have made the following editing:

1)To prevent discriminations (see, e.g., the article on Sir Roger Penrose https://en.wikipedia.org/Roger_Penrose) I have added the title of "Sir" only once at the very top (for documentation, see the "Honors" in the CV , citations being available in numerous independent sources, such as the website of the international conference in Osaka, Japan https://www.scientificfederation.com/chemical-engineering-catalysis/speakers.php , numerous citations available on request);


2) I have removed the second line "Mainstream scientists dismiss his theories as fringe science." and replaced with "originator of hadronic mechanics and chemistry" because mainstream scientists do not consider "fringe science" a lifelong dedication to the verification of the EPR Argument, and also because the current line is demeaning for the Unites States of America according to countless complaints on record throughout two decades.

3) In the 6th line of Biography I changed "a one man organization, the Institute for Basic Research" into "the Institute for Basic Research " because the "one man" 

claim is grossly disproved by the main page of the IBR i-b-r(dot)org/ that has been listing for years a division in Israel headed by Prof. P. Mandell, a division in Kazakstan headed by Prof. A. K. Aringazin, and a division in Nigeria headed by Prof. A. O. E . Animalu, while
stating from its inception " The Institute Statute does not allow the disclosure of their names, but their work can be identified by searching the various scientific archives under". 
4)  The word "Jewish" physicists etc. has been removed everywhere and replaced with "mainstream orthodox" physicists, etc. because: the word "Jewish" it does not exist in Il Grande Grido; Santilli son in law is Jewish; Santilli is known to have supported several Jewish physicists for their participation to  meeting; and the recent International Teleconference on Einstein's Determinism (http://eprdebates.org/epr-conference-2020.php) has been organized by Santilli in collaboration with the Family of Israel Foundation (http://www.i-b-r.org/translational-medicine.htm); 
5) The entire paragraph starting with  "After an explosion..." because Santilli's lawsuit  against Frank Israel . contains documentation and testimonials that Magnegas stockholders, including myself, had suffered financial losses because of misrepresentations in Misplaced Pages's article on Santilli suitable for shorting the stock. In fact, the bottles that caused the indicated accidents were delivered by Magnegas Distributors and not by the factory that, as such has been removed by any and all liabilities. In any case, the listing in an article dedicated to a scientist of deaths  occurred several years after the scientist left the company is blatantly questionable. 
6) I have added  information on Thunder Energies Corporation, whose documentation is available in the corporate SEC filings (that I cannot list here due to the prohibition to edit the references),  the sale of the public shell  and the transfer of the ownership of all technologies to the private company 
Hadronic Technologies Corporation for possible applications of the main technologies to National Security.

7) I have removed completely the statement starting with "In 2017 an article...." because of the evident loss of credibility by Misplaced Pages treating equivocal internet gossip in an article that is supposed to be eventually dedicated to the proof of the most important prediction by Einstein.

8) I added the section on Honors from the CV as quoted independently by various sources. We believe it is demeaning for Misplaced Pages not to quote honors received by the scientists who spent his research life to prove that Einstein was right.

9) I added in the section "Selected Publications" the main papers presenting Santilli's claimed verifications of the EPR and I relisted, for their understanding, Santilli's "Elements of Hadronic Mechanics" that were removed by the article for reasons damaging Misplaced Pages because, according to the record under History, said volumes were accepted by t he Ukraine Academy of Science following severe reviews by highly qualified scientists, such as t he late Klimik, Sissakian, and others. I also added mathematical, physical and chemical papers published in refereed journals in which Santilli is not an editor, which papers are essential for the understanding of the apparent EPR verifications.

In closing allow me to recommend that the article be completed wiuth a section entitled "Research" since all visitors are expecting news on Santilli's apparent verifications of the EPR argument, while now there is none. I can draft this section, but I would need access to the References. Thank you. Jolli321 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jolli321 (talk • contribs) 19:18, 22 October 2020. NOTE: My above specified editing of Santilli's 'article' was removed by David Epstein in about three minutes following its posting. (UTC)

Can please some more administrative persons who can decide have a look at the above proposed change. I find the page insulting, too, so it should be overworked. Till Meyenburg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:908:393:31C0:0:0:0:36D9 (talk) 16:43, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Agreed. This page needs an unbiased administrative review in the interest of Misplaced Pages standing and its role of information vehicle. It is now evident that nobody has been and is allowed to make changes or additions in order to make a fair representation of the contributions of Prof, Santilli who, at age 87, keeps working and publishing in peer-reviewed journals such as Ratio Mathematica 1) and Springer Nature Scientific Reports 2) on subjects that, everybody can see, are vital to science and therefore society .The focus of this Misplaced Pages article is on events presented in negative light only that occurred almost 10 years ago. His recent article published by Nature and his work on the EPR argument point out to new horizons that lead to possible solutions to the crisis of our environment. By looking at the editing history the page, it is evident that nobody has been able to add this information to Prof. Santilli's page because Misplaced Pages remains stubbornly stuck on the defamation campaign fueled years ago by bloggers and stock market profiteers. Misplaced Pages is the loser here. 139.55.184.2 (talk) 21:59, 23 June 2023 (UTC)Tom Yeager139.55.184.2 (talk)

References

  1. https://eiris.it/ojs/index.php/ratiomathematica/article/view/477
  2. Sci Rep 12 , 20674 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-24970-4
Categories:
Talk:Ruggero Santilli: Difference between revisions Add topic