![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | It is requested that an image or photograph of Principal investigator be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific
media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
The list of notable PIs are all based on astronomy projects, which probably reflects the area of expertise of the original author. I don't know enough to add to this list, but maybe people that come across this page that have expertise in different fields could add to the list to flesh it out a bit. For example what about notable PIs on projects such as the LHC, human genome project etc.
There are so many different PIs on so many different projects that I don't believe it's valuable to list people. You will get hundreds to thousands if you include NIH, NSF, DoE, etc. SeanAhern ( talk) 17:37, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
I agree, the list of notable PIs should go. What is a notable PI any way? Any notable scientist has been PI at some point in their career, and probably is PI of many projects at any one time. A list of PIs of notable projects might make sense, but how do you select which projects are notable? And how would that benefit this article? crisluengo ( talk) 12:39, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
I deleted the list of notable PIs since the notion was ridiculous (might as well provide a link to Nobel Prize winners, National Academy of Sciences members, as well as HHMI members). I see that people have mentioned deleting this for over a year with no dissent, so I went ahead and did it. 129.112.109.251 ( talk) 20:45, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
Nailing down the origin of this term is proving surprisingly difficult. It's easy enough to get multiple current definitions in various institutional settings, but how the role, and this term for it, emerged seems obscure. If someone can clear that up, it would be a real service. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.83.31.2 ( talk) 21:22, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
This needs to be removed as there is no point in keeping it. I would like to remove it straight away! Abhijeet Safai ( talk) 09:36, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
Can the article be named as 'Investigators?' because the describes the contents better than the current title in my opinion. Thank you. -- Dr. Abhijeet Safai ( talk) 10:24, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
Please consider ClinicalTrials.gov (Q5133746) for ClinicalTrials.gov versus Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (Q88374053).
ClinicalTrials.gov uses the term "principal investigator". The Chinese database has no such position it seems, and instead uses the term "study leader". Is there anyone here who can comment on whether these are the same concept going by a different name?
Here is an example Chinese study from that database.
It seems so to me, but I wanted to ask here. If it is so, could we include this as an alternative name here for the concept which this article covers? Blue Rasberry (talk) 00:49, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | It is requested that an image or photograph of Principal investigator be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific
media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
The list of notable PIs are all based on astronomy projects, which probably reflects the area of expertise of the original author. I don't know enough to add to this list, but maybe people that come across this page that have expertise in different fields could add to the list to flesh it out a bit. For example what about notable PIs on projects such as the LHC, human genome project etc.
There are so many different PIs on so many different projects that I don't believe it's valuable to list people. You will get hundreds to thousands if you include NIH, NSF, DoE, etc. SeanAhern ( talk) 17:37, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
I agree, the list of notable PIs should go. What is a notable PI any way? Any notable scientist has been PI at some point in their career, and probably is PI of many projects at any one time. A list of PIs of notable projects might make sense, but how do you select which projects are notable? And how would that benefit this article? crisluengo ( talk) 12:39, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
I deleted the list of notable PIs since the notion was ridiculous (might as well provide a link to Nobel Prize winners, National Academy of Sciences members, as well as HHMI members). I see that people have mentioned deleting this for over a year with no dissent, so I went ahead and did it. 129.112.109.251 ( talk) 20:45, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
Nailing down the origin of this term is proving surprisingly difficult. It's easy enough to get multiple current definitions in various institutional settings, but how the role, and this term for it, emerged seems obscure. If someone can clear that up, it would be a real service. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.83.31.2 ( talk) 21:22, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
This needs to be removed as there is no point in keeping it. I would like to remove it straight away! Abhijeet Safai ( talk) 09:36, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
Can the article be named as 'Investigators?' because the describes the contents better than the current title in my opinion. Thank you. -- Dr. Abhijeet Safai ( talk) 10:24, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
Please consider ClinicalTrials.gov (Q5133746) for ClinicalTrials.gov versus Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (Q88374053).
ClinicalTrials.gov uses the term "principal investigator". The Chinese database has no such position it seems, and instead uses the term "study leader". Is there anyone here who can comment on whether these are the same concept going by a different name?
Here is an example Chinese study from that database.
It seems so to me, but I wanted to ask here. If it is so, could we include this as an alternative name here for the concept which this article covers? Blue Rasberry (talk) 00:49, 25 May 2020 (UTC)