Talk:Helena Cronin

Notability
Why is this person notable any more than 1,000s of other people? Authoring a book per se should not make someone eligible for encyclopaedia inclusion... I don't know if I have heard of her or if she simply has a famous-sounding name. This is a seriously questionable inclusion in Wikipedia that was apparently initiated by her former or current students... Stevenmitchell (talk) 00:56, 3 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Wherever this article came from, there is no doubt of Cronin's notability. I've started a Reception section, and even this small beginning is quite enough to show that Cronin has been involved in serious debate on the issues she raises, with major figures like Dawkins, Dennett, Gould and Maynard Smith attacking or defending her. The article was skimpy on both facts and citations -- it's already a little better in those regards -- but notability doesn't depend on what's in the article but what's out there in the world, and there's plenty more on Cronin to choose from. We'll make it into a GA one day... Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:16, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Hastily slapped together BLP
The Reception section seems to be plonked together fairly randomly. The sub-section on 'Darwinism' talks about how Cronin was attacked by Camilla Power for "pontificating .. on how Darwinian theory should inform Blairite social policy". The context for quoting this attack has been completely left out. As it is, it seems like it's just in there just as a form of attack rather than an encyclopedic contribution to understanding Cronin's work. That she's mentioned in an article in an El Salvadorean newspaper as a citation for the percentage of population that are gay/lesbian seems... curiously uninteresting. This biography looks like it's been slapped together piecemeal rather than actually thought about. —Tom Morris (talk) 13:09, 18 July 2014 (UTC)