Talk:Mary Ellen Pleasant

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

I dont know where to begin with this one. First of all, the bias is quite blatant. For example, what scholarly reference states that Mary Ellen Pleasant is smarter than the press that demonised her? I have little doubt that the pro-white right wing media shunned her at the time. This is a valid point to make. There are also a number of controversial aspects to her life, such as contradicting accounts of her activities at certain times. Also useful and interesting to state in the article. To state that she is 'considered by some to be be the "mother of the civil rights struggle in California"' is also acceptable.

The tone and content of this article is better.[1] I propose it is the first point of call to improve the article.--ChrisJMoor 18:00, 27 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for comments

Hi Chris,

I am struggling to see your remarks as helpful to the writer(s) of this article. First, I wish you had described the bias you detected in the article.

If you know something about MEP, it would be helpful to be specific in your comments in this discussion section: for instance, of the, “contradictions in accounts of her activities at certain times”. What period did you have in mind? And what source convinced you? THAT would be helpful.

Also, I find the remark, “I have little doubt that the pro-white right wing media shunned her at the time” confusing. What in the world do you mean by pro-white, right wing? Think about the press back then: it(owned by white males) most certainly did not shun her. The major SF newpapers had negative articles about her starting in the 1880’s.

If you know of other credible sources than the ones in the article, than please add them to the resource section; I, for one, would gladly read them.

I read the article .[1] you recommend. It was not helpful, either. It gives no sources and reports several things as facts that neither Bibbs nor Hudson was able to corroborate on the basis of their primary source research- such as Philadelphia as MEP’s place of birth. Even Holdredge doubted that. The wiki article reports the scholarship and opinions of recognized authorities on Mary Ellen Pleasant. Neither you, nor your reference, does.

She is already recognized as the "Mother of Civil Rights in California", "by some"- That is such a minor caveat unless you say who would oppose that recognition? You? If so, why? I never heard of anyone else opposing that title.

I couldn’t find any comment in the article about stating that Mary Ellen Pleasant "is smarter than the press". If such a comment was ever in there, it wasn’t mine and someone took it out. I never saw it. However, on the basis of your requiring "scholarly references" for that remark, I find it inconsistent that you extol an article with no references.(click on "[1]" above). ???

My references are clear: Bibbs, Hudson, Holdredge, in that order, and Holdredge is a distant 3rd. (You will never find a more biased account than Helen Holdredge’s- between her racism and her uncritical use of Teresa Bell’s diaries, which, by the way, other scholars can’t access.) Quetlin 17:32, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Friends, I cut some of the opinion and conjecture, but i will return to fix this page for its lack of detail.

Hank Chapot 68.164.171.135 (talk) 05:08, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello.... I am currently reading the Ballantine paperback edition of the Holdredge book. It appears to have been edited pretty well & has a bibliography & acknowledgments section in the back that perhaps didn't exist in the earlier Hardback publication. It does mention the previous publication (Of '53) in the frontispiece but seems remarkably evenhanded for a book written first in '53 considering the subject matter & the times. Since its tone is rather admiring of MEP's achievements, is it possible that the original text was heavily revised for the paperback re-issue? Also I have to say, Holdredges book is a great read, I can hardly put it down. I wish I could make a Miniseries about this lady, very remarkable life. Just sayin' .

71.6.81.62 (talk) 23:35, 25 October 2009 (UTC)--mbd--71.6.81.62 (talk) 23:35, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]