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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Forestry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the profession and science of forestry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ForestryWikipedia:WikiProject ForestryTemplate:WikiProject ForestryForestry articles
Hi, I did not make the additions to this page but as someone who was acquainted with Dr. Sillett I think your admin may have been a bit hasty in declaring the edits in question as "vandalism." Granted, some of them are inflammatory in nature -- I am thinking the part about his grandmother being a Holocaust denier, although I do not know this to be untrue -- but many of the additions are not untrue, and are well-referenced in "Wild Trees." The controversy surrounding his work, while ill-founded in my opinion, is absolutely a part of the milieu in which he conducts his research and a consequence of his ecologically-driven academic secrecy. Regarding Marie Antoine, their tryst 300 feet up in the redwoods is an HSU legend and well-documented in the book "Wild Trees" by Richard Preston, referenced extensively on this page. Dr. Sillett is co-holder of patent #6640808 issued 2003 for a suspended intimacy sling, the editor got the patent # wrong but look it up and you will see this is no lie. Regarding his height, I do not know his exact dimensions but he cannot be close to five feet tall. I will re-edit the patent # and recommend this article for a tone revision but your admin should check the facts before rejecting valid factual contributions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.213.34.86 (talk) 04:59, July 30, 2007
Because something is written in the book The Wild Trees, is not an example of "well documented". It does not mean the book can't be referred to, but the book is not exactly a documentation source, let alone "well documented". The articles are to remain encylopedic. These are not biographies. My comment here is not so much aimed at you, as it is just to establish this this concept on the talk page. And your paragraph seemed to be a related text for the fit. Thanks.ThreeWikiteers (talk) 06:04, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
My page has been victimized by vandals recently. The only people who should be adding to or removing from this page are myself and my PA grad student, I did not put myself on Wikipedia so the general public could edit my page! I was never on "To Catch a Predator" which is just plain slander, my current wife was well past the age of consent when we met. My grandmother was most certainly not a Holocaust denier although her 1954 monograph on Weimar sociology has been frequently cited by the misinformed. I did invent a sling for safe, rapid transport through the redwood canopy. I partnered with Jeffrey Fessler, hoping to market the sling to researchers and lumberjacks; Fessler, who is in charge of the business side of this venture, markets the same sling in two forms, one of which is a marital chair sold to backpackers and outdoor enthusiasts. (The other packaging, SafeSwinger, is sold through industry press for its original purpose, "skywalking" (Tyrolean traverse) e.g. two-man forest canopy exploration.) However, I do not consider the swing -- and most certainly its erotic incarnation -- a major accomplishment of my botanical career, so I am removing that reference as well. Stephen C. Sillett15:08, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I have been monitoring this very active page, and the last revert for alleged vandalism I am undoing because it seems to be very clearly NOT vandalism as defined by Wikipedia. The citation about sex in the tree is in the book and featured in many reviews of the book, all of which can be seen elsewhere on the Internet. I looked up the "sex chair" patent and it's not really a chair, I can't describe it really, but it matches up and "Marital chair" seems as good a definition as any and is not an inappropriate term. In addition to the cited revisions that are conceivably vandalism, extensive edits apparently made by the page's original author, the subject of the article, and this colleague Varkey have all been reverted en masse. Please be mindful of the Wikipedia edit guidelines before you bulk revert. 72.213.34.8622:40, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The patent was previously mentioned under a non-existent patent number, while this is closer to the description, the inventor is listed as "Lester Lonnie Black", not "Stephen C. Sillett." I'm having a hard time assuming good faith about statements like "Sillett refuses to share the locations of his alleged tree finds, his assertions are not considered creditable by the botanical community.", with a citation that says nothing of the sort. --GargoyleMT 22:51, 30 July 2007
(UTC)
If had actually searched the U.S. Patent Office's website, you will find that the Inventor is in fact listed as Jeffrey E. Fessler, and the patent was filed on October 2, 2002. The link is here [1] I dont really understand the context of all this, but the patent does appear valid.FuManLu02:13, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You're right, I made a mistake there. I was reading 6926006, which merely refers to 6640808. Here's the diff for the original insertion of the patent under the non-existent number 7442910. --GargoyleMT22:31, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Stovid...You're my dog and everything, but I gotta add my objections to the "my page" claims. I've authored a butt-load of Wikipedia pages, info boxes, and other features, but none of them are mine, and others are free to make legitimate revisions. But I was just talking with Senor Wilson about your work (and about your no-account brother), and he said you'd been wikified, so I thought I'd look it up. Fight the vandalism, but go with the flow, homie. User:PurpleChez 6 Nov 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.24.1.102 (talk) 14:29, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Is it really nessecary to have this long list of publications? Arn't these listed on an external site we could link to, it looks a mess having them in the article. --Darksun13:57, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A publication list of every paper in which one's name appears is totally unnecessary, this page resembles a Myspace account. Please reduce this as this is a supposed "unbiased article" and not an exercise in vanity.
