Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a2a8056d788919ef

Jump to content

Talk:Daniel A. Griffith

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 24 days ago by Dagriffith-1948 in topic Request to remove inaccurate maintenance template

Possible AI use

[edit]

Concerns have been raised about AI-generated content in this article. This is a procedural talk page section to discuss it. There is no need to ping me in response. Rationale: the initial version (note malformed AfC template and other WP:AISIGNS) and also the subsequent large rewrite Gnomingstuff (talk) 04:54, 12 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

Request to remove inaccurate maintenance template

[edit]

I am the subject of this article. The reason given for the maintenance template refers to issues in the article’s creation history — specifically a malformed AfC template in the initial version and a large rewrite in April 2026. These are procedural concerns, not content concerns. The current version of the article is fully sourced to authoritative, reliable, and stable publications from major scholarly societies, including the Royal Society of Canada and the American Statistical Association. Each citation links directly to official honoree lists that explicitly name me as a recipient. These sources meet the requirements of WP:V, WP:RS, and WP:BLP for verifying academic honors. The maintenance template states that the article may contain hallucinated information, unverifiable claims, original research, fictitious references, or copyright violations. None of these issues are present in the current article. The content is straightforward, factual, and supported by high‑quality primary sources appropriate for documenting academic awards. Because the concerns cited in the template relate only to early drafting artifacts and not to the present, properly sourced content, I request removal of the template per WP:BLP and WP:V. The article does not exhibit the problems described in the template, and its continued presence misrepresents the reliability of the current sourcing. Dagriffith-1948 (talk) 17:34, 19 July 2026 (UTC)Reply