This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Alice Goffman 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 |
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 21 January 2016. The result of the discussion was keep. |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This is a new article on a living person. In my view, as currently written it lacks balance of coverage and neutral point of view. Hopefully as the article is further developed, these will be remedied. Thanks, DA Sonnenfeld ( talk) 16:12, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
And a few more...
Regards, DA Sonnenfeld ( talk) 20:42, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
It has gotten a warmer reception than any participant observation study I can remember (I am too young to remember Coming of Age in Samoa). Certainly, the book could support a page. Alternatively, User:DASonnenfeld or someone who has read it and the reviews of it should feel free to describe it more fully. E.M.Gregory ( talk) 20:38, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
is something that should be mentioned, no? --- http://www.ted.com/speakers/alice_goffman# Benvhoff ( talk) 21:35, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
There was something so unbalanced about having the response to her book arranged as
with "reception being all the positive responsesm and all of the negative responses under "controversy", that I changed it to
Not sure if these are the best subheads. But it cannot be right to have the "reception" describe as uniformly positive, and the very serious and often admiring reviews and articles that criticize her methodology as "controversy", even though many of the reviewers in the positive category take stands in the controversy about the book. E.M.Gregory ( talk) 11:26, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
It has been suggested that Goffman is not notable as she is an assistant professor and although she has received some prestigious awards and fellowships, it is perhaps debatable whether she satisfies the criteria listed in WP:NACADEMICS. However, she clearly meets WP:GNG: "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list." She clearly meets this guideline as she and her book have been the subject of multiple articles in reliable sources such as the NYTimes and the Chronicle of Higher Education, and WP:NACADEMICS "is a guideline and not a rule, exceptions may well exist. Some academics may not meet any of these criteria, but may still be notable for their academic work." NPalgan ( talk) 10:58, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
Steven Lubet, a Law Professor at Northwestern University, argues that Alice Goffman, a Sociology Professor at the University of Wisconsin, has completely changed her account of the events follow the death of Chuck. In her book she describe participating in a manhunt for Churck’s killer. In her revised account she says that there was only “talk” and the manhunt she described did not really happen. In Lubet’s own words,
"It is as though we have now read about two entirely different events—the one described in the book, and the one in Goffman’s recantation—as indeed I think we have. But which is the truth? “ Lubet goes on to argue that this factual discrepancy is so serious it calls into question other arguments Professor Goffman makes.
"Alice Goffman's Denial of Murder Conspiracy Raises Even More Questions” by Steven Lubet published in “The New Republic,” June 3, 2014. <ref> https://newrepublic.com/article/121958/sociologist-alice-goffman-denies-murder-conspiracy-run<ref> Professor Goffman’s repsonse to Professor Lubet’s earlier criticisms linked to in the above article. <ref> http://www.ssc.wisc.edu/soc/faculty/docs/goffman/A%20Reply%20to%20Professor%20Lubet.pdf<ref>
Ishmael Dott (
talk) 22:00, 20 January 2016 (UTC)Ishmael Dott
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Alice Goffman 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 |
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 21 January 2016. The result of the discussion was keep. |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This is a new article on a living person. In my view, as currently written it lacks balance of coverage and neutral point of view. Hopefully as the article is further developed, these will be remedied. Thanks, DA Sonnenfeld ( talk) 16:12, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
And a few more...
Regards, DA Sonnenfeld ( talk) 20:42, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
It has gotten a warmer reception than any participant observation study I can remember (I am too young to remember Coming of Age in Samoa). Certainly, the book could support a page. Alternatively, User:DASonnenfeld or someone who has read it and the reviews of it should feel free to describe it more fully. E.M.Gregory ( talk) 20:38, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
is something that should be mentioned, no? --- http://www.ted.com/speakers/alice_goffman# Benvhoff ( talk) 21:35, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
There was something so unbalanced about having the response to her book arranged as
with "reception being all the positive responsesm and all of the negative responses under "controversy", that I changed it to
Not sure if these are the best subheads. But it cannot be right to have the "reception" describe as uniformly positive, and the very serious and often admiring reviews and articles that criticize her methodology as "controversy", even though many of the reviewers in the positive category take stands in the controversy about the book. E.M.Gregory ( talk) 11:26, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
It has been suggested that Goffman is not notable as she is an assistant professor and although she has received some prestigious awards and fellowships, it is perhaps debatable whether she satisfies the criteria listed in WP:NACADEMICS. However, she clearly meets WP:GNG: "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list." She clearly meets this guideline as she and her book have been the subject of multiple articles in reliable sources such as the NYTimes and the Chronicle of Higher Education, and WP:NACADEMICS "is a guideline and not a rule, exceptions may well exist. Some academics may not meet any of these criteria, but may still be notable for their academic work." NPalgan ( talk) 10:58, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
Steven Lubet, a Law Professor at Northwestern University, argues that Alice Goffman, a Sociology Professor at the University of Wisconsin, has completely changed her account of the events follow the death of Chuck. In her book she describe participating in a manhunt for Churck’s killer. In her revised account she says that there was only “talk” and the manhunt she described did not really happen. In Lubet’s own words,
"It is as though we have now read about two entirely different events—the one described in the book, and the one in Goffman’s recantation—as indeed I think we have. But which is the truth? “ Lubet goes on to argue that this factual discrepancy is so serious it calls into question other arguments Professor Goffman makes.
"Alice Goffman's Denial of Murder Conspiracy Raises Even More Questions” by Steven Lubet published in “The New Republic,” June 3, 2014. <ref> https://newrepublic.com/article/121958/sociologist-alice-goffman-denies-murder-conspiracy-run<ref> Professor Goffman’s repsonse to Professor Lubet’s earlier criticisms linked to in the above article. <ref> http://www.ssc.wisc.edu/soc/faculty/docs/goffman/A%20Reply%20to%20Professor%20Lubet.pdf<ref>
Ishmael Dott (
talk) 22:00, 20 January 2016 (UTC)Ishmael Dott