This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Naomi Wolf 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 |
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 multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on November 12, 2018 and November 12, 2020. |
This article can be trimmed considerably. Snooganssnoogans ( talk) 03:36, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
The article talks about misinformation, but that word presumes the article possesses The Truth about covid. The reality is that science is evolving and depends on new empirical inputs. The covid vaccines were developed under Operation Warp Speed at great haste to try to cope with a global pandemic. Nobody on the planet knows the full and final "truth" about covid vaccines and what would constitute "true" information versus "misinformation." Science evolves In the summer of 2021, it was believed that 2 covid shots made a person "fully vaccinated" and good to go, but by the summer of 2022 it had sadly become true that people with 2 covid shots could conceivably get covid, spread it, be hospitalized with it, and indeed even die of it. A lot of the covid censorship was based on false certitude. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.49.27.38 ( talk) 22:57, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
I propose adding her latest conspiracy theories about time travel vaccines to the main article under the conspiracy theories section.
Also, her current views and her audiences are neither liberal or progressive. She should no longer be called an 'American liberal' when she is playing to an audience of conservative and far-right cranks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C4:7910:D100:ECD5:5B48:C8F1:342B ( talk) 21:37, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
She eventually got suspended for vaccine disinformation ( https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-57374241) JidGom ( talk) 23:37, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
Why does introducing Wolf as a conspiracy theorist merit the "Since around 2014, Wolf has regularly been described as" context, when we wouldn't do that for any other change in a person's career? A television personality who successfully pivots to writing fiction doesn't get "Since 2020, he is also a writer", it just goes into the opening sentence as present tense. Either Wolf is now widely enough regarded as a conspiracy theorist for this to be in the opening sentence, or it's a minor aspect of her recent life and is already covered at the end of the lead: a strongly-positioned second sentence with caveats is neither one thing nor the other. -- Lord Belbury ( talk) 10:22, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
Sources describing Wolf as a "conspiracy theorist" or using related terms include:
- Boteach, Shmuely (September 10, 2014). "Naomi Wolf's allegations of an Israeli genocide fuel anti-Semitism". The Jerusalem Post. Retrieved April 2, 2021.
Naomi is so enmeshed with conspiracy theories that she even questions whether ISIS is a true threat.- Fisher, Max (October 5, 2014). "The insane conspiracy theories of Naomi Wolf". Vox. Retrieved April 2, 2021.
[I]t is important for readers who may encounter Wolf's ideas to understand the distinction between her earlier work, which rose on its merits, and her newer conspiracy theories, which are unhinged, damaging, and dangerous.- Brereton, Alex (October 6, 2014). "The line between conspiracy and scepticism is getting harder to draw – just ask Naomi Wolf". The Guardian. Retrieved April 2, 2021.
So Naomi Wolf thinks that the Isis beheading videos may not have been genuine. In a series of Facebook posts over the weekend that also included theories about an Ebola-driven military quarantine of US society and fake ballots in the Scottish referendum, she crossed over into conspiracy territory.- Ditum, Sarah (October 7, 2014). "Naomi Wolf is not a feminist who became conspiracy theorist – she's a conspiracist who was once right". New Statesman. London. Retrieved April 1, 2021.
Perhaps it's not that Wolf is a feminist who's degenerated into conspiracism, but instead that she's a conspiracy theorist who happened to fall into feminism first.- Moynihan, Michael (April 14, 2017) [October 11, 2014]. "From ISIS to Ebola, What Has Made Naomi Wolf So Paranoid?". The Daily Beast. Retrieved January 3, 2020.
Wolf's path from respectability to conspiracy theory isn't uncommon.- Aaronovitch, David (May 29, 2019). "Beware liberal attempts to rewrite history". The Times. Retrieved March 19, 2021.
She is furthermore a serial espouser of mad conspiracy theories, insisting on their plausibility in the face of overwhelming evidence- Kreizman, Maris (June 14, 2019). "A Journey With Naomi Wolf". The New Republic. Retrieved April 2, 2021.
In 2014 she spread conspiracy theories including the belief that the beheading of two American journalists by ISIS was faked and staged.- Poole, Steven (October 9, 2019). "Permanent Record: Edward Snowden spies on the spies". New Statesman. London. Retrieved March 19, 2021.
'Chemtrails' are what conspiracy theorists, including the author Naomi Wolf, call the contrails of jet planes: rather than being harmless water vapour, they think they are deliberate sprays of noxious chemicals into the atmosphere, for reasons unclear.- Onion, Rebecca (March 30, 2021). "A Modern Feminist Classic Changed My Life. Was It Actually Garbage?". Slate. Retrieved April 2, 2021.
I can see this progression of Wolf's thinking in every Trump- and COVID-era conspiracy theorist, from Stop the Steal to QAnon, who, like Wolf, seems to favor a 'natural order' where their particular problems rank first. It goes from 'this sucks so much' to 'someone is surely pulling these strings' to 'guys—I found the someone!'- "Fauci got $1 million from Israel, 'doesn't work for us,' conspiracist Naomi Wolf says on Fox News". Haaretz.com. Apr 20, 2021. Retrieved Jan 7, 2022.
Conspiracy theorist Naomi Wolf suggested that Dr. Anthony Fauci is beholden to Israel rather than serving the United States.
Can we justify labelling Naomi as a “conspiracy theorist” in her headline as an author? I feel like it’s very hard to maintain neutral point of view for an article on an author if they labelled a conspiracy theorist? I would make the point that more people know her first and foremost as an author. I believe it’s much more important to not label authors as conspiracy theorists unless a majority of people would consider that so. Dispute a topic doesn’t make someone a conspiracy theorist in absolute terms does it? binary.dat ( talk) 05:18, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
not label authors as conspiracy theorists unless a majority of people would consider that soWikipedia does not do majority votes. It is based on reliable sources instead. -- Hob Gadling ( talk) 08:30, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
"...according to mainstrem media..." makes it look like the article was wrien by a conspiracy theorist Czarnibog ( talk) 07:59, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
Her PhD thesis was published at last, 6 years after being awarded [1], along with corrections to some of the issues and a torrent of critics on the thesis itself and wether the jury did a proper job. This can likely be used to further expand the article JidGom ( talk) 21:11, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
References
Regarding the Covid vaccine infertility story. I think one take-away from the NPR article was that an early step in a typical meme-spread is that an influential person takes it up. That was Wolf, who then juiced the story up a bit and repeated it multiple times. The current language that Wolf tweeted a link to a Facebook article doesn't, I feel, do justice to the main point in the reference: Wolf is the one who dredged this story out of FB and made it popular -- M.boli ( talk) 15:56, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
Conspiracy theory overused and misused to the point of meaninglessness, unless the point is to tar someone with the “kook” handle. love how Naomi’s work is so critically examined now she is not agreeing with her former tribe 2605:B100:91E:C203:B08A:6029:DD4F:6D94 ( talk) 03:58, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
The page is protected so I cannot add this, but the page should set the record straight in that the Julian Assange rape allegations/investigations were completely dropped without results. See BBC news reporting from 2019. This is relevant in that it informs the actual outcome of the case. 190.195.146.6 ( talk) 04:39, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
and Wolf has been proven correct.She was not proven correct. The case allegations werent dropped, the investigation was closed because Assange wasnt available. The prosecutors even made a statement at the time saying the complainants were credible. Softlemonades ( talk) 10:34, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
This edit removed Wolf's birth date, and thus age. It seems weird to me. Especially having a bio of a notable public figure which does not have so much as her age. -- M.boli ( talk) 12:48, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
Wolf appeared on the Ali G show, a show with the actor Sascha Baron Cohen portraying himself as a hip hop figure who purportedly seeks to broadcast information to his audience, unbeknownst to his interviewee that it is all a farce. Wolf fell for Ali G's schtick in a discussion about feminism, where Ali G checked every box on the list of "how to insult a feminist." Wolf did behave with grace in light of Ali G's behavior. This is probably the main reason anyone has ever heard of Wolf. 24.184.235.195 ( talk) 00:13, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
This section is so vacuously written that it casts a negative light on the probable group of people who have taken on the task to curate Naomi Wolf's Wiki entry.
There is no review or explanation of this book, and what ideas it contains or theories that it may propose. No exposition of her thesis either! What is this book about?
All we read is about some factual errors in the book, and how that casts aspersions on everything Wolf does, writes, or touches. Clearly that is the intention. Show me one thesis or one book that I can't find a number of factual errors by using Google search. This section appears as a hit piece. Her real crime is that she seems to question the dominant established narratives and that she has remained a dissident and anti-establishment rebel, and instead of succumbing and submitting to the new elitist cultural order and ideology, she actually challenges them. There is the putrid air of intellectual cancellation in the air.
This section is reporting the controversy surrounding this book without the context and without reporting the substance of the work. This is not in the spirit of Wikipedia. Forkhume ( talk) 02:48, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
The "Not to be Confused with Naomi Klein" hatnote is a joke, and does not belong in this article. Sure, some people allegedly confused the two on Twitter (the premise of Klein's 2023 book), but that does not justify the inclusion of that tag: it probably does justify a sentence somewhere in the body of the article, which exists. Shankar Sivarajan ( talk) 22:16, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
The downsides include added confusion ("why would i be looking for this other person?")I confuse them because of the hat note Softlem ( talk) 11:10, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change "Naomi Rebekah Wolf (born 1962) is an American feminist author, journalist, and conspiracy theorist. After the 1991 publication of her first book, The Beauty Myth, Wolf became a leading spokeswoman of what has been called the third wave of the feminist movement..." to "Naomi Rebekah Wolf (born 1962) is an American conservative author, journalist, and conspiracy theorist. After the 1991 publication of her first book, The Beauty Myth, Wolf became a spokeswoman of what has been called the third wave of the feminist movement. Wolf currently embraces far-right extremism and no longer embodies intersectional feminism."
(This is not the edit, just an explanation) Naomi Wolf currently aligns with American conservatism. She has co-authored work with Steve Bannon, she spreads mis/dis-information and has rebranded her political alliances. This by no means justifies how she has been attacked online, but it should be named early on her wiki page that she is no longer this figurehead for third-wave feminism. Rahomie ( talk) 23:46, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Naomi is not a feminist author but a conspiracy theorist. 2600:1011:B18F:84D9:9578:326:FA46:F6B1 ( talk) 16:18, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Naomi Wolf 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 |
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 multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on November 12, 2018 and November 12, 2020. |
This article can be trimmed considerably. Snooganssnoogans ( talk) 03:36, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
The article talks about misinformation, but that word presumes the article possesses The Truth about covid. The reality is that science is evolving and depends on new empirical inputs. The covid vaccines were developed under Operation Warp Speed at great haste to try to cope with a global pandemic. Nobody on the planet knows the full and final "truth" about covid vaccines and what would constitute "true" information versus "misinformation." Science evolves In the summer of 2021, it was believed that 2 covid shots made a person "fully vaccinated" and good to go, but by the summer of 2022 it had sadly become true that people with 2 covid shots could conceivably get covid, spread it, be hospitalized with it, and indeed even die of it. A lot of the covid censorship was based on false certitude. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.49.27.38 ( talk) 22:57, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
I propose adding her latest conspiracy theories about time travel vaccines to the main article under the conspiracy theories section.
Also, her current views and her audiences are neither liberal or progressive. She should no longer be called an 'American liberal' when she is playing to an audience of conservative and far-right cranks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C4:7910:D100:ECD5:5B48:C8F1:342B ( talk) 21:37, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
She eventually got suspended for vaccine disinformation ( https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-57374241) JidGom ( talk) 23:37, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
Why does introducing Wolf as a conspiracy theorist merit the "Since around 2014, Wolf has regularly been described as" context, when we wouldn't do that for any other change in a person's career? A television personality who successfully pivots to writing fiction doesn't get "Since 2020, he is also a writer", it just goes into the opening sentence as present tense. Either Wolf is now widely enough regarded as a conspiracy theorist for this to be in the opening sentence, or it's a minor aspect of her recent life and is already covered at the end of the lead: a strongly-positioned second sentence with caveats is neither one thing nor the other. -- Lord Belbury ( talk) 10:22, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
Sources describing Wolf as a "conspiracy theorist" or using related terms include:
- Boteach, Shmuely (September 10, 2014). "Naomi Wolf's allegations of an Israeli genocide fuel anti-Semitism". The Jerusalem Post. Retrieved April 2, 2021.
Naomi is so enmeshed with conspiracy theories that she even questions whether ISIS is a true threat.- Fisher, Max (October 5, 2014). "The insane conspiracy theories of Naomi Wolf". Vox. Retrieved April 2, 2021.
[I]t is important for readers who may encounter Wolf's ideas to understand the distinction between her earlier work, which rose on its merits, and her newer conspiracy theories, which are unhinged, damaging, and dangerous.- Brereton, Alex (October 6, 2014). "The line between conspiracy and scepticism is getting harder to draw – just ask Naomi Wolf". The Guardian. Retrieved April 2, 2021.
So Naomi Wolf thinks that the Isis beheading videos may not have been genuine. In a series of Facebook posts over the weekend that also included theories about an Ebola-driven military quarantine of US society and fake ballots in the Scottish referendum, she crossed over into conspiracy territory.- Ditum, Sarah (October 7, 2014). "Naomi Wolf is not a feminist who became conspiracy theorist – she's a conspiracist who was once right". New Statesman. London. Retrieved April 1, 2021.
Perhaps it's not that Wolf is a feminist who's degenerated into conspiracism, but instead that she's a conspiracy theorist who happened to fall into feminism first.- Moynihan, Michael (April 14, 2017) [October 11, 2014]. "From ISIS to Ebola, What Has Made Naomi Wolf So Paranoid?". The Daily Beast. Retrieved January 3, 2020.
Wolf's path from respectability to conspiracy theory isn't uncommon.- Aaronovitch, David (May 29, 2019). "Beware liberal attempts to rewrite history". The Times. Retrieved March 19, 2021.
She is furthermore a serial espouser of mad conspiracy theories, insisting on their plausibility in the face of overwhelming evidence- Kreizman, Maris (June 14, 2019). "A Journey With Naomi Wolf". The New Republic. Retrieved April 2, 2021.
In 2014 she spread conspiracy theories including the belief that the beheading of two American journalists by ISIS was faked and staged.- Poole, Steven (October 9, 2019). "Permanent Record: Edward Snowden spies on the spies". New Statesman. London. Retrieved March 19, 2021.
'Chemtrails' are what conspiracy theorists, including the author Naomi Wolf, call the contrails of jet planes: rather than being harmless water vapour, they think they are deliberate sprays of noxious chemicals into the atmosphere, for reasons unclear.- Onion, Rebecca (March 30, 2021). "A Modern Feminist Classic Changed My Life. Was It Actually Garbage?". Slate. Retrieved April 2, 2021.
I can see this progression of Wolf's thinking in every Trump- and COVID-era conspiracy theorist, from Stop the Steal to QAnon, who, like Wolf, seems to favor a 'natural order' where their particular problems rank first. It goes from 'this sucks so much' to 'someone is surely pulling these strings' to 'guys—I found the someone!'- "Fauci got $1 million from Israel, 'doesn't work for us,' conspiracist Naomi Wolf says on Fox News". Haaretz.com. Apr 20, 2021. Retrieved Jan 7, 2022.
Conspiracy theorist Naomi Wolf suggested that Dr. Anthony Fauci is beholden to Israel rather than serving the United States.
Can we justify labelling Naomi as a “conspiracy theorist” in her headline as an author? I feel like it’s very hard to maintain neutral point of view for an article on an author if they labelled a conspiracy theorist? I would make the point that more people know her first and foremost as an author. I believe it’s much more important to not label authors as conspiracy theorists unless a majority of people would consider that so. Dispute a topic doesn’t make someone a conspiracy theorist in absolute terms does it? binary.dat ( talk) 05:18, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
not label authors as conspiracy theorists unless a majority of people would consider that soWikipedia does not do majority votes. It is based on reliable sources instead. -- Hob Gadling ( talk) 08:30, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
"...according to mainstrem media..." makes it look like the article was wrien by a conspiracy theorist Czarnibog ( talk) 07:59, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
Her PhD thesis was published at last, 6 years after being awarded [1], along with corrections to some of the issues and a torrent of critics on the thesis itself and wether the jury did a proper job. This can likely be used to further expand the article JidGom ( talk) 21:11, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
References
Regarding the Covid vaccine infertility story. I think one take-away from the NPR article was that an early step in a typical meme-spread is that an influential person takes it up. That was Wolf, who then juiced the story up a bit and repeated it multiple times. The current language that Wolf tweeted a link to a Facebook article doesn't, I feel, do justice to the main point in the reference: Wolf is the one who dredged this story out of FB and made it popular -- M.boli ( talk) 15:56, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
Conspiracy theory overused and misused to the point of meaninglessness, unless the point is to tar someone with the “kook” handle. love how Naomi’s work is so critically examined now she is not agreeing with her former tribe 2605:B100:91E:C203:B08A:6029:DD4F:6D94 ( talk) 03:58, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
The page is protected so I cannot add this, but the page should set the record straight in that the Julian Assange rape allegations/investigations were completely dropped without results. See BBC news reporting from 2019. This is relevant in that it informs the actual outcome of the case. 190.195.146.6 ( talk) 04:39, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
and Wolf has been proven correct.She was not proven correct. The case allegations werent dropped, the investigation was closed because Assange wasnt available. The prosecutors even made a statement at the time saying the complainants were credible. Softlemonades ( talk) 10:34, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
This edit removed Wolf's birth date, and thus age. It seems weird to me. Especially having a bio of a notable public figure which does not have so much as her age. -- M.boli ( talk) 12:48, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
Wolf appeared on the Ali G show, a show with the actor Sascha Baron Cohen portraying himself as a hip hop figure who purportedly seeks to broadcast information to his audience, unbeknownst to his interviewee that it is all a farce. Wolf fell for Ali G's schtick in a discussion about feminism, where Ali G checked every box on the list of "how to insult a feminist." Wolf did behave with grace in light of Ali G's behavior. This is probably the main reason anyone has ever heard of Wolf. 24.184.235.195 ( talk) 00:13, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
This section is so vacuously written that it casts a negative light on the probable group of people who have taken on the task to curate Naomi Wolf's Wiki entry.
There is no review or explanation of this book, and what ideas it contains or theories that it may propose. No exposition of her thesis either! What is this book about?
All we read is about some factual errors in the book, and how that casts aspersions on everything Wolf does, writes, or touches. Clearly that is the intention. Show me one thesis or one book that I can't find a number of factual errors by using Google search. This section appears as a hit piece. Her real crime is that she seems to question the dominant established narratives and that she has remained a dissident and anti-establishment rebel, and instead of succumbing and submitting to the new elitist cultural order and ideology, she actually challenges them. There is the putrid air of intellectual cancellation in the air.
This section is reporting the controversy surrounding this book without the context and without reporting the substance of the work. This is not in the spirit of Wikipedia. Forkhume ( talk) 02:48, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
The "Not to be Confused with Naomi Klein" hatnote is a joke, and does not belong in this article. Sure, some people allegedly confused the two on Twitter (the premise of Klein's 2023 book), but that does not justify the inclusion of that tag: it probably does justify a sentence somewhere in the body of the article, which exists. Shankar Sivarajan ( talk) 22:16, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
The downsides include added confusion ("why would i be looking for this other person?")I confuse them because of the hat note Softlem ( talk) 11:10, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change "Naomi Rebekah Wolf (born 1962) is an American feminist author, journalist, and conspiracy theorist. After the 1991 publication of her first book, The Beauty Myth, Wolf became a leading spokeswoman of what has been called the third wave of the feminist movement..." to "Naomi Rebekah Wolf (born 1962) is an American conservative author, journalist, and conspiracy theorist. After the 1991 publication of her first book, The Beauty Myth, Wolf became a spokeswoman of what has been called the third wave of the feminist movement. Wolf currently embraces far-right extremism and no longer embodies intersectional feminism."
(This is not the edit, just an explanation) Naomi Wolf currently aligns with American conservatism. She has co-authored work with Steve Bannon, she spreads mis/dis-information and has rebranded her political alliances. This by no means justifies how she has been attacked online, but it should be named early on her wiki page that she is no longer this figurehead for third-wave feminism. Rahomie ( talk) 23:46, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Naomi is not a feminist author but a conspiracy theorist. 2600:1011:B18F:84D9:9578:326:FA46:F6B1 ( talk) 16:18, 25 January 2024 (UTC)