User talk:Feministprofessor

Welcome!
Hi, Feministprofessor. Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Our intro page contains a lot of helpful material for new users—please check it out! If you need help, visit Questions, ask me on my talk page, or. menaechmi (talk) 15:09, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

July 2017
Hello, I'm Menaechmi. I noticed that you recently removed content from Joan Wallach Scott without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. menaechmi (talk) 15:11, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

to answer your question, I did, indeed, fill out the explanation for the edits I did on the Joan Wallach Scott entry. I said that the previous acocunts were inaccurate and full of ideological comments about her work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Feministprofessor (talk • contribs) 11:14, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I hope you don't mind that I moved your reply here from User:Feministprofessor to this page, so that the conversation can be shown properly.


 * And yes, I read your edit summary "gross inaccuracies were deleted as well as the clearly ideological representations of Scott's work. Whoever wrote the text did not understand Scott's work, and had a reason for misrepresenting it.k)" . And while I can understand your issue, and appreciate that you were following one of Wikipedia's core policies of being bold, you are removing well-sourced (at least sourced) information from the page. I definitely agree that the section is far too long for a biography of someone, but am reading through and trying to find the points that you're saying are written by "someone who is antagonistic to her." There is definitely some problematic language like "Communist historian". But removing the discussion of controversy seems wrong. To me, it seems this article needs a scalpel not a butchers knife.

If you could please, on the article's talk page Talk:Joan Wallach Scott explain why you removed what you removed and open a discussion. menaechmi (talk) 15:36, 28 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Thank you for taking the conversation there, now if you don't mind, we can just take some time (WP:There is no deadline) and edit some other articles while we figure out what to do for that page. I have requested that the editor that added most of the information join in on the discussion, and they seem to be pretty active. Sometimes these things take time, so please don't feel discouraged, because we all want to make the best encyclopedia we can, and we love having people as passionate as you here. menaechmi (talk) 16:05, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

We need to know if that editor who added most of the information really read anything Scott has written....it is impossible that s/he did or that editor is not very good at what s/he does. I wonder if it is possible for Scott not to be included in your encyclopedia. I think she would prefer not to be there at all, than to have herself represented in such a poor fashion.

answering your question
Please help me with...

Feministprofessor (talk) 15:13, 28 July 2017 (UTC)