Talk:Brian Lang

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Category -- Academics of the University?[edit]

Should he really be in this category -- he's an administrator, not an academic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.42.131.159 (talk) 14:10, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No. He hasn't been an academic for 30 years. Yes, he is principal of a university, but you wouldn't say the CEO of an engineering firm is an engineer! If there are no objections, I am going to remove this acrticle from that category. 217.42.132.52 (talk) 08:36, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FRSE?[edit]

I vaguely remember reading about a few people complaining when he was made an FRSE -- didn't some existing Fellows protest that he was getting it ex officio for being principal of a Scottish university instead of for any noteworthy intellectual achievement? Can't remember where I saw it -- maybe The Herald. Perhaps someone who has access to their archives or someone at the RSE can find a source. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.148.24.5 (talk) 18:45, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Harassment case[edit]

An anonymous user deleted details of the harassment accusations, with the edit summary "removed misleading statement". The statements in question are properly sourced and seem to form a fair summary of the events as recounted in the source. So I have reverted the edit. If there are more details of the case that should be mentioned, please add them (with sources). KarenSutherland (talk) 20:18, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've temporarily removed this claim from the article: "The employment tribunal did not proceed after Mrs McGonigle unreservedly withdrew her case for unfair dismissal and issued a statement through her solicitor admitting that she had never made any allegations of sexual harassment or intimidation against Lang." This is not backed up by a source and could be a libel against McGonigle, since it basically asserts that she made a malicious allegation. I'm going off to hunt for a source for this. If it's literally true, presumably Lang sued McGonigle for slander -- that must be reported somewhere. 217.42.131.212 (talk) 11:09, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
OK, there aren't many matches on Google for "brian lang" mcgonigle. With the sources we've got is this [1] (about the initial allegations) and this [2] (scroll down) (apparently about some related incident about leaking student records), plus a few others that, like, summarize what we know. Because we haven't got sources, I don't think that statement can go back in the article. Yes, the tribunal didn't go ahead, so the settlement must have involved the formal allegations being withdrawn. I'll put in a short phrase about that. 217.42.131.212 (talk) 11:31, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done 217.42.131.212 (talk) 11:34, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's a good decision. Obviously this whole issue is very sensitive and we need to be careful about not going beyond what the sources tell us. We know (a) there were accusations of harassment, (b) a settlement was reached "minutes before" the court case. Strictly speaking, whether or not the allegations were withdrawn depends on whether the settlement involved Laing admitting wrongdoing. From context, I suspect they were withdrawn, so I think we should leave that statement in, but add a citation needed tag. KarenSutherland (talk) 15:43, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I notice that a claim about the allegations being false has been deleted by an anonymous user. Normally I'd revert this since the claim hasn't been tagged for very long, but that claim has appeared, been tagged, and disappeared several times before, and no reference has ever been supplied. Since the last one mentioned a statement from the University of St Andrews, I checked their archive of press releases and couldn't find anything. (Although a university statement probably isn't a reliable source in this case anyway.) So I'm not going to revert it.
Pending further discussion or supply of sources, I will revert any unsourced claim about the harassment case. KarenSutherland (talk) 10:15, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

References etc.[edit]

I've added two general references to cover most of the points in the article -- this article was almost completely unsourced. I can't find a reference to the thing about him being a visiting scholar at Napier Unversity. Indeed, Napier University doesn't seem to have a "Department of Communication and Media"! I've tagged this point. KarenSutherland (talk) 16:10, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have gotten rid of the Napier statement and the other tagged statement (see Harrassment case above). 217.42.132.52 (talk) 08:39, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Name[edit]

Is his middle name really Andrew? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.137.233.32 (talk) 09:51, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I checked the St Andrews website, and he's definitely Brian A. Lang. Are you saying that you think the A stands for something else? KarenSutherland (talk) 16:41, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

At St Andrews[edit]

I've removed various POV statements added by Tim Bates. First, they read like a hagiography, not an encyclopedia article. Second, an article by and an interview with Lang are hardly reliable sources for discussing his legacy (and one of the articles was dates March 2001, which is unlikely to reflect his legacy -- he started at St Andrews in Jan 2001). Third, there's no reference for the statement that he was a 'central figure' in funding discussions. Fourth, the stuff about the new medical school building and the proportion of students finishing their degrees surely belongs in the St Andrews Univ. article, not here. Fifth, the statements were misleading -- they read like St Andrews was 'turned around' by Lang, whereas the climb up the league tables actually began under Struther Arnott. (I have retained the statement about his successor but moved it to the end of the article.) KarenSutherland (talk) 07:11, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Brian Lang. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:29, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Brian_Lang&oldid=1203440036"