This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Remsense (talk | contribs) at 03:05, 24 September 2024 (→Controversy Section?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 03:05, 24 September 2024 by Remsense (talk | contribs) (→Controversy Section?)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Skip to table of contents |
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Noam Chomsky article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16Auto-archiving period: 45 days |
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments, look in the archives, and review the FAQ before commenting. Restarting a debate that has already been settled constitutes disruptive editing, tendentious editing, and "asking the other parent", unless consensus changes. |
faq page Frequently asked questions
|
Noam Chomsky is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Noam Chomsky has been listed as one of the Philosophy and religion good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This article appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page as Today's featured article on December 13, 2004. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
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 sourced must 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 level-4 vital article is rated GA-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Other talk page banners | |||||
|
Road to FA, pt. II
This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived. |
Some remaining tasks to take this article to featured status, with some imported from the recent peer review:
- Review all citations for text–source integrity
- Replace primary sources with best-in-class sources
- Replace chomsky.info sources
- Bundle citations with
{{sfnm}}
where feasible - Rewrite the parts that rely on "Brain from Top to Bottom"
- Rewrite the beginning of § Universal grammar and add a paragraph break
- Define "rationalism" as parallel to definition of "empiricism"
- Get a better source for Saudi Arabia political views; try McGilvray
- Get a better source for views on partition of Palestine
- Reduce hagiography in § In politics: remove quotes, pare second paragraph, expand on Srebrenica massacre remarks, consider page number for Rabbani 2012, consider paring re: Horowitz, Kay, ADL, Dershowitz
- Address history of controversial statements on genocide in the political beliefs section doi:10.5038/1911-9933.14.1.1738
- Turn the achievements laundry list into readable prose
- Confirm with sourced prose or remove the flatlist items from the infobox
- Add commas after "in year X" clauses
- Consider whether to expand on his views on the Russian invasion of Ukraine
- Incorporate noteworthy anti-Chomsky critique into the Political views section so the final section can focus on Influence/Legacy
- Cross-reference "Noam Chomsky". Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
- Invite reviewers to the FA nom
czar 04:21, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
Infobox image
Should it be confirmed that he passed away, usually infoboxes are updated with black&white images or images of the subject during their 'peak'. This criteria has been used on actors (Anouk Aimée), writers (Bernard Pivot/Joan Didion), artists (Eric Carle), directors (Roger Corman), athletes (Jerry West/Bill Russell), scientists (Katherine Johnson), comedians (Tom Smothers) and even political figures (Robert Mugabe). I propose the following image to be used on his infobox once he passes away as it reflects a younger Chomsky. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 19:50, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- I'd agree. It's a nice image of him as well. PlateOfToast (talk) 19:55, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- While having an image of the person during their peak (or, at least, not necessarily the most recent one) is often what is done after their death, I don't think the black-and-white part is an actual criterion (see Elizabeth II, with her official portrait instead). Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 19:56, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- It's usually one or the other, it could be an old image and colored like Elizabeth II or it could be black and white. I'm leaning towards this one as it's one of a younger Chomsky and it's not bad in terms of quality. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 19:58, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, normally when someone dies it's replaced with a recent photo with an iconic/posterity photo of them at their peak. There's no requirement for it to be black and white, just iconic - or at least, that's my understanding of it.
- P.S. Very cool name you got there!! DimensionalFusion (talk) 20:25, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks! Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 20:41, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Agreed, it's a good fit and consistent with other biographies of recently deceased individuals. Maurnxiao (talk) 20:31, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- I agree with adding this younger version. --NoonIcarus (talk) 21:03, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
Hello, there's also this other one that I like as an option where he's smiling, though either would be fine TheLoyalOrder (talk) 03:51, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
Some concerns I have over the "Reception and influence" section
I have some concerns about the section - not enough to consider it NPOV, but enough that I think some changes are warranted:
- "As a result of his influence, there are dueling camps of Chomskyan and non-Chomskyan linguistics. Their disputes are often acrimonious" - This really needs expansion. I know Daniel Everett is well-known as a critic of Chomsky's linguistic ideas. The "in academia" section in general is I think lacking in stuff on Chomsky's reception and influence in linguistics.
- "Critics have argued that despite publishing widely on social and political issues, Chomsky has no formal expertise in these areas" - I don't like that this section is solely sourced to defenders of Chomsky and doesn't quote any of his critics.
- In general I think the "in politics" section relies too heavily on primary sources of right-wing Chomsky critics. I think that paints a particular view of his critics.
Eldomtom2 (talk) 16:26, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
- Additional note - Decoding Chomsky is referenced but only for some banal claims; I think its critique of Chomsky could at least be mentioned.--Eldomtom2 (talk) 18:05, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
This really needs expansion.
In what way? The article is about Chomsky and not Chomskyan linguistics, which are already covered in their own section.The "in academia" section in general is I think lacking in stuff on Chomsky's reception and influence in linguistics.
In what way? What sources do you recommend on the topic?publishing widely on social and political issues ... doesn't quote any of his critics. ... relies too heavily on primary sources of right-wing Chomsky critics
Do the critics need to be cited directly? This summation is coming from a third party. Ideally we wouldn't cite any primary source directly, whether in praise or criticism. Feel free to share any secondary source missing here.Decoding Chomsky is referenced ... its critique of Chomsky could at least be mentioned
In what way? Since this is a biography of Chomsky and not an overview of all criticism of Chomsky, we should care what sources secondary to Decoding Chomsky discuss as being significant to Chomsky's biography.
- Might want to break some of these bullets into separate threads if they require separate discussion. Most of this can be solved by adding the text or suggesting the sources you think are missing. czar 20:59, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
- "In what way? The article is about Chomsky and not Chomskyan linguistics, which are already covered in their own section." - If the article is going to say "there are dueling camps of Chomskyan and non-Chomskyan linguistics", there should probably be a sentence summing up some of the key points of contention between the two camps.
- "Do the critics need to be cited directly?" - well, a fair chunk of the right-wing critics are cited directly. "This summation is coming from a third party." - but they're not really third parties, because they're summing up criticisms of Chomsky and then defending them - and we're quoting their defences directly and giving them more space than the criticism. If the defences of Chomsky were cited to third parties who were not themselves defending Chomsky, I'd be happier.
- "we should care what sources secondary to Decoding Chomsky discuss as being significant to Chomsky's biography." - This was my point. Decoding Chomsky was a book that got a fair bit of attention, as can be seen by the decent-size article it has, so there are a lot of reviews etc. we can use to talk about it.
- "Most of this can be solved by adding the text or suggesting the sources you think are missing." - I always find this criticism a bit lazy, to be honest. It often takes less time to point out an issue than fix it, and most of us have other things to do besides edit Misplaced Pages.--Eldomtom2 (talk) 22:37, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
Influenced (academia) list
The first and last names on this list are mismatched. 2601:646:8F00:7860:1DC4:7986:9B13:D579 (talk) 22:55, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- What do you mean? Remsense ‥ 论 23:02, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
Controversy Section?
Among some other problems throughout his life, Noam was close with former financier and sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein. Noam has claimed to have met with him several times after his original conviction and often gave extremely lame or bizarre responses to people on this topic such as "none of your business" or "he served his time" despite the severity of his crimes and the heinous nature. Cruetresin (talk) 02:32, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
- "Controversy" sections are often the result of poor writing, noxious and poorly representative; the current article does the much preferable thing of interspersing those details throughout the article where they actually belong, in proportion to how they are represented in sources about Chomsky per WP:NPOV. Remsense ‥ 论 02:38, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
- Understood. Where do you think the relationship with Epstein should go? I think it's pretty significant and has a wealth of reporting. Cruetresin (talk) 02:40, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
- We don't put emphasis on the Epstein connection because reliable sources don't. If the goal amounts to activism, then the intent is misplaced. I'm fairly sure this discussion has been had before, but if you want to pitch your case you can collate some sources here—I'm sure many are of relatively low quality (not dismissing the situation itself here, don't misunderstand) but generally these cases are decided based on what the best available sources have to say. Remsense ‥ 论 02:43, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
- I guess it would depend on what a reliable source is but regardless Chomsky himself has endorsed that he has met with him.
- Here are two to get the ball rolling
- https://www.wsj.com/articles/jeffrey-epstein-noam-chomsky-leon-botstein-bard-ce5beb9d?mod=hp_lead_pos1
- https://www.wsj.com/articles/jeffrey-epstein-calendar-cia-director-goldman-sachs-noam-chomsky-c9f6a3ff?mod=article_inline Cruetresin (talk) 02:51, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
- See WP:Reliable sources for bountiful guidance.
- The other part of the equation here is one of proveable interest versus innuendo: it's simply not that interesting on an encyclopedia what friends someone has unless they, y'know, do something—even if the WSJ wrote about it, there's just not much for us to synthesize from that. I get it's frustrating for people who smell a lot of smoke, as it were—it's irrelevant here, but I happen not to with Chomsky in particular—but we need sources saying there's a big fire if we don't want to go afoul of our policies about biographies of living people. We can't just write suggestively about smoke, even if it's well-sourced. Remsense ‥ 论 03:04, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
- Misplaced Pages controversial topics
- Misplaced Pages former featured articles
- Misplaced Pages good articles
- Philosophy and religion good articles
- Featured articles that have appeared on the main page
- Featured articles that have appeared on the main page once
- Old requests for peer review
- Biography articles of living people
- GA-Class level-4 vital articles
- Misplaced Pages level-4 vital articles in People
- GA-Class vital articles in People
- GA-Class anarchism articles
- WikiProject Anarchism articles
- GA-Class Anti-war articles
- High-importance Anti-war articles
- GA-Class Atheism articles
- Low-importance Atheism articles
- GA-Class biography articles
- GA-Class biography (politics and government) articles
- Top-importance biography (politics and government) articles
- Politics and government work group articles
- GA-Class biography (science and academia) articles
- High-importance biography (science and academia) articles
- Science and academia work group articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- GA-Class socialism articles
- High-importance socialism articles
- WikiProject Socialism articles
- GA-Class politics articles
- High-importance politics articles
- GA-Class American politics articles
- High-importance American politics articles
- American politics task force articles
- GA-Class Libertarianism articles
- High-importance Libertarianism articles
- WikiProject Libertarianism articles
- WikiProject Politics articles
- GA-Class Linguistics articles
- Top-importance Linguistics articles
- GA-Class Theoretical Linguistics articles
- Theoretical Linguistics Task Force articles
- GA-Class applied linguistics articles
- Applied Linguistics Task Force articles
- GA-Class philosophy of language articles
- Philosophy of language task force articles
- WikiProject Linguistics articles
- GA-Class Pennsylvania articles
- Mid-importance Pennsylvania articles
- GA-Class Philadelphia articles
- Mid-importance Philadelphia articles
- Automatically assessed Philadelphia articles
- GA-Class Philosophy articles
- Mid-importance Philosophy articles
- GA-Class philosopher articles
- Mid-importance philosopher articles
- Philosophers task force articles
- GA-Class philosophy of science articles
- Mid-importance philosophy of science articles
- Philosophy of science task force articles
- GA-Class philosophy of mind articles
- Mid-importance philosophy of mind articles
- Philosophy of mind task force articles
- Mid-importance philosophy of language articles
- GA-Class psychology articles
- Mid-importance psychology articles
- WikiProject Psychology articles
- GA-Class University of Pennsylvania articles
- Mid-importance University of Pennsylvania articles
- Pages in the Misplaced Pages Top 25 Report