Talk for Article "Why is physicist Donna Strickland not a full professor?"

Talk about this Article

  1. Maybe Donna Strickland’s own view is of some interest in this discussion?
    In a BBC Radio interview ( http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/play/p06mrmnt ) she denied any suggestion of sexism , saying “I have always been treated like an equal in my career.” When asked directly why someone with her achievements and reputation wasn’t holding a full professorship, she answered “I never applied.”

  2. This is obviously set up to be an opinion piece about the underrepresentation of women in science. Change the headline and remove the editorialization. An article such as this detracts from the credibility you are trying to create at WikiTribune.

    1. The two people she is directly being compared to in the body of the article are female professors in her same faculty. Part of the question is “why do these two similarly-aged similarly-accomplished (until the nobel prize win, that is) female physicists have a full professorship, while this nobel laureate does not?”

      It’s not an inevitable opinion piece to ask “why does this person who achieved this thing not have this status associated with thing-achievers of this sort?”

  3. Without a lede, the article kind of begins abruptly. Many people know that Donna Strickland recently won a Nobel prize, but many do not. What about including a quick, 1-2 sentence lede introducing who she is and why she is relevant?

    1. In addition, more clarification is needed on why (if at all) it is weird that she’s not a full professor. Maybe some data about university researchers, or Nobel winners?

      1. Following your suggestion, I’m adding a bit more context. Feel free to do things like this yourself – you have every right to do so!

      2. I’ll make a list of nobel laureates in physics of the past, say, 20 years, and see how many were professors.

        Edit: List added

        Edited: 2018-10-10 00:10:11 By Oriana Carciente (talk | contributions) + 24 Characters .. + 22% change.‎‎ (Note | Diff)

        1. Are you listing if they were professors at the time of receiving the Nobel Prize or if they currently are?

          1. Trying to list if they were at the time, there are question marks or notes where I think they were not professors at the time of the nobel prize reception. Most of them seem to get their professorship ~10yrs before the nobel prize.

            Edited: 2018-10-10 04:43:57 By Oriana Carciente (talk | contributions) + 34 Characters .. + 16% change.‎‎ (Note | Diff)

            1. Great! I looked into a couple last night that you had left blank but then realized I didn’t know the answer to that question. It could be best to simple write in parenthesis when they became a professor (if at all). I’ll try to look into more when I get the chance. And you are using bold for ones which were not professors at the time of nobel prize reception, correct?

              1. Yes, bold ones are those that either were not professors at the time or did not become professors at any time.

Subscribe to our newsletter and be the first to collaborate on our developing articles:

WikiTribune Open menu Close Search Like Back Next Open menu Close menu Play video RSS Feed Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Reddit Follow us on Instagram Follow us on Youtube Connect with us on Linkedin Email us