Talk:Elaine Showalter

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.

Biography: Science and Academia

	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 is supported by the science and academia work group (assessed as Low-importance).
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Literature Low‑importance

	Literature portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Literature on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LiteratureWikipedia:WikiProject LiteratureTemplate:WikiProject LiteratureLiterature articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Feminism Mid‑importance

	Feminism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Feminism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Feminism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FeminismWikipedia:WikiProject FeminismTemplate:WikiProject FeminismFeminism articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women writers Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

Does this article really need to be so long? Most other academics have a paragraph or two. This article is longer than Charlotte Bronte's article! Can it not be pruned a little? 86.129.40.6 16:35, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would say that longer is better and contains more information. Wikipedia is not limited by article length. I would say if Charlotte Bronte's article is smaller than it needs work. This encyclopedia should have as much information as it can. It is good for people who want to know about this woman, and that is the point in the first place. I would like more information on what she said to anger the CFS community though. A quote would be nice. SadanYagci 14:06, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, we really don't want to reduce information where it actually exists. Further develop the Charlotte Bronte article, if it is out of proportion. --Literaturegirl (talk) 16:05, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

XMRV References

These quotes fail WP:MEDRS and WP:OR. I have reverted to the original content. -- TerryE (talk) 02:31, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I -- reader, August, 2010 -- that the Showalter bio is self-aggrandizing and written by someone way too close to the subject. Books on Feminist Theory (in the US) were published in the 70s. The comment about her being a founder is off the mark and inaccurate. She may have participated in its practice to some extent, but she's no Monique Wittig; some of her books seem more opportunistic than thoughtfully academic..—Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.218.23.102 (talk • contribs) 14:24, 6 August 2010

Of course the XMRV references are relevant. They clearly undermine her thesis that CFS is an expression of hysteria. And of course Science and the PNAS are reliable sources!? And citing these sources does not amount to original research; citing these sources is necessary to describing the ways Showalter's thesis is at odds with other literatures.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.25.107.8 (talk • contribs) 14:56, 29 September 2010

If a citation for the claim that Showalter has received hate mail can not be produced, the reference to it should be eliminated as its inflammatory and vilifies an entire class of patients.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.25.107.8 (talk • contribs) 14:58, 29 September 2010

Look, I personally do not agree with what Showalter has written and do not like to edit this article, but describing the way Showalter's thesis is at odds with other literature must come from a unified source or it is WP:SYN, "do not join A and B together to imply a conclusion C that is not mentioned by either of the sources." Thanks. Ward20 (talk) 03:59, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the sentence referencing the XMRV study from the article. The study has now been debunked and is thought to be the result of contamination, as is well described in the Pathophysiology section of the CFS article. The Science article that was used as a reference for this sentence is now tagged with an editorial expression of concern. http://www.sciencemag.org/content/333/6038/35.1.full Given the level of incredulity surrounding the study, attempting to use it as proof that Showalter's views are incorrect is misleading. Discussion of the relative merits of competing theories of the causes of CFS is better left to the articles about CFS, where these issues can be explored in the necessary detail. 203.143.164.154 (talk) 08:49, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bibliography

I have commenced a tidy-up of the Bibliography section using cite templates. Capitalization and punctuation follow standard cataloguing rules in AACR2 and RDA, as much as Wikipedia templates allow it. ISBNs and other persistent identifiers, where available, are commented out, but still available for reference. This is a work in progress; feel free to continue. Sunwin1960 (talk) 05:24, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

suggest adding item re: her work in promoting non academic careers

(see this source) https://www-chronicle-com.mutex.gmu.edu/article/whos-afraid-of-elaine-showalter-now 72.83.221.243 (talk) 19:15, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hysteria and "modern" illnesses

That section is written from the perspective that those illnesses do exist (some in the health profession and many who suffer from these illnesses - the WP:WEASEL is strong in that one). For dissociative identity disorder, that is not an undisputed fact, so the section lacks WP:NPOV. --Hob Gadling (talk) 16:19, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]