Talk:Mary Whiton Calkins

PhD refusal
This statement: "She is best remembered today for Harvard University's refusal to grant her a Ph.D.. Although she had a near-perfect examination, they still refused her." What this page neglects to mention is -why- her PhD was refused. She is not best remembered for her PhD being refused but, but for her PhD being refused because she was a woman. Vince 03:24, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 04:16, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Reproduced almost word for word from another source
Not sure if this sort of thing matters (or who is taken from who here) but this entry is almost word for word the same as open from the APA's online Women's newsletter found here: http://www.apa.org/pi/women/resources/newsletter/2011/03/mary-calkins.aspx. TheMonitor514 (talk) 00:44, 18 April 2011 (UTC)


 * I agree that it's very similar. If I could remember where, there's a place on here to report when other sites copy Wikipedia articles without giving credit. —C.Fred (talk) 00:47, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

A comparative and chronological inaccuracy
Toward the bottom of the article, it states: "Calkins was the first female to complete all the coursework, examinations and research for a doctoral degree and, although it was never officially conferred, she is regarded as the first woman to get her doctoral degree in the field of psychology."

However, Calkins was denied her PhD in Psychology in 1895, which was one year after Margaret Floy Washburn earned her PhD in Psychology. Perhaps this sentence can be restated to indicate that Calkins unofficially can be regarded as the first woman to complete all Psychology doctoral requirements at Harvard.

Reference: https://www.verywellmind.com/mary-whiton-calkins-biography-2795541

47.184.101.36 (talk) 23:12, 1 March 2018 (UTC)AmateurPsychologyHistorian

Julie Ragbeer
can we please keep out the julie ragbeer thing like the 5 people on twitter who know who she is are being very annoying Hwelch10 (talk) 22:19, 26 February 2024 (UTC)


 * I appreciate the person who removed the last Julie Ragbeer mention - this is getting out of hand. next person who vandalizes the page anonymously just make a page for Julie seriously Hwelch10 (talk) 05:07, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't think it's vandalism at all- this is an important revival/ part of her legacy and this is how many people will come to know of her now. Whilst Julie isn't exactly an A-Lister, I do think she has had a significant impact? 82.42.121.25 (talk) 12:16, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
 * It's not really a revival of her legacy, looking at articles where there is a legacy tab it typically refers to cultural impact, and how one is viewed after death. It never refers to someone being mentioned by an artist who is by all means a cult figure.
 * That being said if you really want to have Julie Ragbeer on Wikipedia, you can always create an article about her, no one is stopping you from doing that. PierreTheTsar (talk) 19:12, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Pierre you are so right, I definitely put this in less-than-eloquent terms so I appreciate your contribution :) Hwelch10 (talk) 21:24, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks PierreTheTsar (talk) 20:13, 28 February 2024 (UTC)