Talk:Mary Baker Eddy: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Slatersteven (talk | contribs) |
→Addition reversed.: Reply |
||
Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
I added a section on Historiography of Mary Baker Eddy because understanding the sources, pro and con, of her biography is important. Everything is well sourced. It was undone as follows (from Slatersteven): "I am unsure about a lot of this, take it to takl and justofy it." I am not sure what do do next. By the way, I found this in the Wikipedia help site: "Be bold in improving articles! When adding facts, please provide references so others may verify them." What is the next step in the process? [[User:Metaphysical historian|Metaphysical historian]] ([[User talk:Metaphysical historian|talk]]) 18:00, 1 February 2023 (UTC) |
I added a section on Historiography of Mary Baker Eddy because understanding the sources, pro and con, of her biography is important. Everything is well sourced. It was undone as follows (from Slatersteven): "I am unsure about a lot of this, take it to takl and justofy it." I am not sure what do do next. By the way, I found this in the Wikipedia help site: "Be bold in improving articles! When adding facts, please provide references so others may verify them." What is the next step in the process? [[User:Metaphysical historian|Metaphysical historian]] ([[User talk:Metaphysical historian|talk]]) 18:00, 1 February 2023 (UTC) |
||
:See [[wp:brd]]. "Few people in history have had such a variance of views (good and bad) as Mary Baker Eddy and her religion. Here are some notable examples:" seems unsourced and [[wp:or]]. Nor do we need a list of people's opinions, and certainly not sourced to their own works. We need to have reason to think these peoples opinions are significant which means [[wp:rs]] think they are. Also please read [[wp:cite]] you did not add any inline citations you did add the words ref. Also the AMA "source" makes no mention if Eddy (see [[WP:SYNTH]]). [[User:Slatersteven|Slatersteven]] ([[User talk:Slatersteven|talk]]) 18:08, 1 February 2023 (UTC) |
:See [[wp:brd]]. "Few people in history have had such a variance of views (good and bad) as Mary Baker Eddy and her religion. Here are some notable examples:" seems unsourced and [[wp:or]]. Nor do we need a list of people's opinions, and certainly not sourced to their own works. We need to have reason to think these peoples opinions are significant which means [[wp:rs]] think they are. Also please read [[wp:cite]] you did not add any inline citations you did add the words ref. Also the AMA "source" makes no mention if Eddy (see [[WP:SYNTH]]). [[User:Slatersteven|Slatersteven]] ([[User talk:Slatersteven|talk]]) 18:08, 1 February 2023 (UTC) |
||
::Thanks for your comments, but I am not certain I understand some of the points. [1] the statement that comments on Eddy have an extraordinary variance seems clear from the sources that I listed, from good to bad. The three people cited, Bliss Knapp, Frederick Peabody, and Mark Twain, are all well-known in Christian Science history, so their opinions on Eddy are certainly valid for quoting, I believe. There are countless Wiki biographical articles, but most do not have anywhere near that level of extreme variance, which I think it worth noting, because the extreme variance (pro and con) impacts the reliability of the early sources [2] the comments about the lack of reliability of the ''World’s'' allegations come from (a) Peter Wallner, the Library Director of the New Hampshire Historical Society and author of the 2014 detailed history of the Next Friends Suit, which was started by the New York ''World''. (b) Gillian Gill, the author of the biography Mary Baker Eddy, which deals extensively with the Next Friends Suit. (cc) Bates & Dittemore, an important biography of Eddy. Dittemore was a former Director of the Christian Science church. It would be difficult to find others who are in a better position to evaluate the New York ''World'' claims [3] If you are looking for a source for the APA quote, I can add this: |
|||
:: |
|||
::https://www.psychiatry.org/newsroom/news-releases/apa-calls-for-end-to-armchair-psychiatry |
|||
:: |
|||
::The APA statement is a blanket declaration about not having their members provide “armchair” diagnoses: “Today, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) reiterates its continued and unwavering commitment to the ethical principle known as "The Goldwater Rule." We at the APA call for an end to psychiatrists providing professional opinions in the media about public figures whom they have not examined, whether it be on cable news appearances, books, or in social media. Armchair psychiatry or the use of psychiatry as a political tool is the misuse of psychiatry and is unacceptable and unethical.” |
|||
:: |
|||
::They did not mention Eddy or anyone else but it relates to all “public figures.” |
|||
::Thanks. [[User:Metaphysical historian|Metaphysical historian]] ([[User talk:Metaphysical historian|talk]]) 19:43, 1 February 2023 (UTC) |
Revision as of 19:43, 1 February 2023
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Mary Baker Eddy article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 180 days |
This article is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on December 3, 2017. |
Addition reversed.
I added a section on Historiography of Mary Baker Eddy because understanding the sources, pro and con, of her biography is important. Everything is well sourced. It was undone as follows (from Slatersteven): "I am unsure about a lot of this, take it to takl and justofy it." I am not sure what do do next. By the way, I found this in the Wikipedia help site: "Be bold in improving articles! When adding facts, please provide references so others may verify them." What is the next step in the process? Metaphysical historian (talk) 18:00, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
- See wp:brd. "Few people in history have had such a variance of views (good and bad) as Mary Baker Eddy and her religion. Here are some notable examples:" seems unsourced and wp:or. Nor do we need a list of people's opinions, and certainly not sourced to their own works. We need to have reason to think these peoples opinions are significant which means wp:rs think they are. Also please read wp:cite you did not add any inline citations you did add the words ref. Also the AMA "source" makes no mention if Eddy (see WP:SYNTH). Slatersteven (talk) 18:08, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for your comments, but I am not certain I understand some of the points. [1] the statement that comments on Eddy have an extraordinary variance seems clear from the sources that I listed, from good to bad. The three people cited, Bliss Knapp, Frederick Peabody, and Mark Twain, are all well-known in Christian Science history, so their opinions on Eddy are certainly valid for quoting, I believe. There are countless Wiki biographical articles, but most do not have anywhere near that level of extreme variance, which I think it worth noting, because the extreme variance (pro and con) impacts the reliability of the early sources [2] the comments about the lack of reliability of the World’s allegations come from (a) Peter Wallner, the Library Director of the New Hampshire Historical Society and author of the 2014 detailed history of the Next Friends Suit, which was started by the New York World. (b) Gillian Gill, the author of the biography Mary Baker Eddy, which deals extensively with the Next Friends Suit. (cc) Bates & Dittemore, an important biography of Eddy. Dittemore was a former Director of the Christian Science church. It would be difficult to find others who are in a better position to evaluate the New York World claims [3] If you are looking for a source for the APA quote, I can add this:
- https://www.psychiatry.org/newsroom/news-releases/apa-calls-for-end-to-armchair-psychiatry
- The APA statement is a blanket declaration about not having their members provide “armchair” diagnoses: “Today, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) reiterates its continued and unwavering commitment to the ethical principle known as "The Goldwater Rule." We at the APA call for an end to psychiatrists providing professional opinions in the media about public figures whom they have not examined, whether it be on cable news appearances, books, or in social media. Armchair psychiatry or the use of psychiatry as a political tool is the misuse of psychiatry and is unacceptable and unethical.”
- They did not mention Eddy or anyone else but it relates to all “public figures.”
- Thanks. Metaphysical historian (talk) 19:43, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
Categories:
- B-Class Christianity articles
- Top-importance Christianity articles
- B-Class Christian theology articles
- Top-importance Christian theology articles
- Christian theology work group articles
- WikiProject Christianity articles
- B-Class United States articles
- Low-importance United States articles
- B-Class United States articles of Low-importance
- B-Class Massachusetts articles
- Low-importance Massachusetts articles
- WikiProject Massachusetts articles
- B-Class Boston articles
- Low-importance Boston articles
- WikiProject Boston articles
- WikiProject United States articles
- B-Class biography articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- B-Class Women's History articles
- High-importance Women's History articles
- All WikiProject Women-related pages
- WikiProject Women's History articles
- B-Class Religion articles
- Top-importance Religion articles
- B-Class New religious movements articles
- Top-importance New religious movements articles
- New religious movements articles
- WikiProject Religion articles
- B-Class Women writers articles
- Mid-importance Women writers articles
- WikiProject Women articles
- WikiProject Women writers articles
- B-Class Women in Religion articles
- High-importance Women in Religion articles
- Selected anniversaries (December 2017)