Talk:Drew Weissman

Help needed in the RNA vaccine article regarding "Before the COVID-19 pandemic, no mRNA drug or vaccine was licensed for use in humans."?!

Hi, I'm coming in from the article on RNA vaccine where this quote comes from. The issue is that this is an argument that convinces a lot of people who are against the use of the covid-19 vaccines. Can anybody help verify this quote and put it in relation to another quote "The use of RNA vaccines goes back to the early 1990s." - Thy and greetings from Belgium, :) SvenAERTS (talk) 10:01, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

What is the Methodist Church doing in this article? In the article about Kariko, another church is mentioned. It seems completely irrelevant and probably false. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.253.244.17 (talk) 15:20, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

It checks out to the BU article: they were affiliated with the UMC. —C.Fred (talk) 15:22, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Freely licensed photo

@ArcticSeeress: Sorry, I didn't realize the image was omitted intentionally. I checked the source provided in the image description on Commons and I agree that the rationale for the CC licensing is unclear at best. Regardless, it is still being used in other articles and in other language editions. Amusingly, it's not even possible to tag the photo on Commons for review of its licensing because it's fully protected.

Schwede66 has since re-added it, probably not noticing the issue.

Can any better photos be found? 98.170.164.88 (talk) 18:32, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Indeed, I didn’t check for any issues; I saw it in use in another article and given that it was protected, I assumed it was fine. Schwede66 18:35, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

New user uploading their own work as published in a science mag. Yeah right. Schwede66 18:42, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

It’s been deleted. Schwede66 18:50, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

I tried to get the attention of admins at Commons here: Commons:Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard#Protected_page_possibly_copyright_violation. I took it to the Administrator's Noticeboard after two other users posted about it elsewhere. I've yet to get a response. ArcticSeeress (talk) 18:44, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

This video from the Columbia University Irving Medical Center seems to be licensed under the CC BY license and a screenshot of Weissman could be extracted. The quality is not as high as the previous photo, but it's better than nothing. 98.170.164.88 (talk) 19:02, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Maybe. Weissman may still be the copyright holder of the footage he provided, so even if the university publishes the video under a creative commons licence, his portion may not be under the same licence. This is an area of copyright I'm not very familiar with, so I don't know if it can be uploaded to Commons. Similar images can be found on Commons (see for instance this Commons category), but I don't think there is a consensus on whether screenshots of Zoom conferences and the like are copyright violations or not (relevant Village pump discussion). ArcticSeeress (talk) 19:52, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

After reviewing the links you sent, yeah, it's a lot more complicated than I realized. I guess the university probably didn't ask him to sign a copyright waiver before hopping on the video call... Perhaps we'll have to wait until a new, unambiguously freely licensed photo becomes available, as I can't find any other candidate photos of him in the usual places (Flickr, etc.).

By the way, c:File:Drew Weissman (cropped).png still exists, and it's clearly just a cropped version of the now-deleted photo. 98.170.164.88 (talk) 20:04, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I've notified the admin at AN that deleted the original work. ArcticSeeress (talk) 20:11, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

User:GRuban uploaded a frame from a Vimeo video. It seems fine to me. 98.170.164.88 (talk) 22:17, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

--GRuban (talk) 22:26, 2 October 2023 (UTC)