Talk:Susan Michie

Notability
http://www.psychol.ucl.ac.uk/susan.michie/index.html

The above link gives the reason for including an article on Susan Michie which would link to Anne McLaren in the same way as the article on Jonathan Michie


 * As written, it's not entirely clear that she is notable, although I do believe that is the case. You may want to look at Notability (academics) to get an idea of which academics are considered notable, and revise the article accordingly.

Some notes: Health Psychology in Practice (which she co-edited and wrote several chapters for) is on the syllabus for: Michie does not appear to be affiliated with any of these institutions, so this textbook may be considered a "significant and well-known" academic work. Choess 20:37, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
 * PSM402 Professional & Contextual Issues in Health Psychology, City University, London
 * PYPW15 Placement and practitioner skills, London Metropolitan University
 * PSY4004 Applications of Health Psychology, Middlesex University, (as recommended text)
 * Health Psychology in Practice, University of Leiden

Clean up
I don't know how notable she is, but I wikified this anyway since it looked so terrible. I don't know anything about the content except a bit about the career of the person that's meant to be her father.--Jaibe 19:56, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

COI?
Nedrutland added a COI banner to the article in April, but this was unexplained and I cannot see what it may have referred to. I have removed it. Ned, could you comment on what led to the tagging? Fences &amp;  Windows  10:40, 20 July 2020 (UTC)


 * An editor sharing the name of the article and has only edited this article - see Special:Contributions/Susan_Michie; that looks like a COI to me. Nedrutland (talk) 10:47, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
 * There were two edits two years ago, making factual updates about her work: .The more appropriate tag would be Template:Autobiography, but it's not required - it's a maintenance template to flag possible bias, not a permanent badge of shame, but I don't think those edits introduced bias. I'll add a connected contributor template on the talk page. Fences  &amp;  Windows  23:45, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply, Nedrutland. I forgot to ping you. Fences  &amp;  Windows  23:48, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Political views
There has been some recent disagreement on this article as to how notable Susan Mitchie's politics are. It definitely seems to be a source of fascination in the media, see this Daily Mail article describing her as a "Communist-supporting SAGE scientist". I'm wary of how this works as a conspiratorial nudge about scientific advisors.

From what is verifiably cited, Mitchie (identified as a member of the Communist Party) spoke in support of Jeremy Corbyn at a meeting in London in 2018. That's probably an accurate reflection of the Communist Party's position, but should be interpreted like any other person speaking at a public meeting. That was one event three years ago, and we don't have references for comments from her in relation to the Communist Party since then.

At the moment Susan Mitchie is primarily notable as a scientist, and her politics are a relevant personal detail, that's how I think it should be handled in the article. Extua (talk) 12:28, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

I agree. Susan Michie is notable as a scientist and advisor on SAGE. Her politics are not pertinent to her science. The details given under Political Views are news about the communist party about which it is reported that she commented. This is ephemoral rather than encyclopedic in nature. I would support shortening the section on Political Views to the fact that she is a member of a British communist party with relevant citation. Mountain9 (talk) 14:15, 18 June 2021 (UTC)


 * I also agree. Her notability is as a scientist. Her membership of a small political party is not greatly relevant and certainly should not be in the lede. Michie came to greater public awareness during COVID-19 as an advisor to the Gov.t and I suspect that the focus on her CPB membership in recent months are by those who criticise the Gov.t policy response to CV-19 (particularly lockdowns and related restrictions) and seek to discredit advisors to the Gov.t. I would support reducing her party membership from a sub-section ('Political Views') to a sentence (or two) under 'Personal life' - as it was as recently as 10 June 2021. Nedrutland (talk) 15:32, 18 June 2021 (UTC)


 * In the past few days the article has described her as a "card-carrying communist" (a term which has a substantial amount of baggage, besides not being encyclopedic in tone) and a "leading member of the communist party" without clarifying what that means.
 * As Michie is notable as a scientist rather than a political activist, it makes sense to mention her membership in a sentence or two, probably those currently at the end of the 'early life' section. The current 'politics' section is mostly not about Michie herself. Events in 2017 and 2019 do not seem to relate to Michie herself; with the 2018 decision, the current sources do not make it clear what Michie's role was. Instigating the move not to stand against Labour might be significant, but announcing it (which is how the sources describe it) is less so. Richard Nevell (talk) 17:15, 18 June 2021 (UTC)


 * The Daily Telegraph today has a column by its associate editor attacking Government advisors on CV-19 and calling Michie a "card-carrying communist" and a "pinko".
 * Would some other editor care to edit the page now? Nedrutland (talk) 17:05, 19 June 2021 (UTC)


 * I agree with the suggestion of Richard Nevell that the statement that Michie is a member of a Communist Party (which appears at the end of the Early Life section) is adequate for this biographical entry and that the section Political Views is not relevant or adequately referenced and should be deleted. But I am inexperienced in what to do in a 'tis, tisn't' battle where deletions are repetitively reposted or altered slightly and then reposted. Advice on how to proceed would be appreciated Mountain9 (talk) 17:39, 19 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Thanks all for the comments, I have now pared down the relevant information to two lines in the 'personal life' section, see this edit. Extua (talk) 21:54, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

This is madness. She is a highly notable Government adviser, advising on policy relating to the close control of people. And her communist beliefs aren’t relevant to that? Get real. Communism is *the* political orthodoxy where close control of people is concerned. Boscaswell  talk  04:24, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

I absolutely agree with Boscaswell. I tried to edit the lede with emphasis on why her long-standing membership of the Communist Party is noteworthy, but got closed down. And now the wokes are trying to delete the page on Communist mass killings. Arguing over whether the deaths of 6 people at the Waukesha Christmas Parade was a "car crash" or an "incident". Echoing the Washington Post's coverage that the deaths were "caused by a SUV" that "drove" into the crowd. This is why Wikipedia is becoming a laughing stock. I've had enough. I'm out of here forever. 88.105.14.76 (talk) 20:26, 29 November 2021 (UTC)