Talk:Michel Foucault/GA1

GA Review[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Brigade Piron (talk · contribs) 07:59, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm happy to take this on if you're OK with that? I must say, from a preliminary glance, the article is extremely impressively done and the referencing/style seems extremely good. More detailed comments to follow. If there is a delay for any reason, please chase me up at my talk page! Brigade Piron (talk) 07:59, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The comment on the talk page that the "influence" section is lacking is certainly valid, but I'd prefer not to follow the user's advice and quick-fail this. Personally, I feel that this is above all a biography article. While influence is certainly important, it is only a part of a whole which is generally there. Personally, in line with other writer-articles, I don't believe a book-by-book approach is that necessary here (it already seems to cover most of them too). Obviously though the influence section is the most important to address.
"He was a key player in the 1975 protests against the Spanish government to execute 11 militants sentenced to death without a fair trial. It was his idea to travel to Madrid with 6 others to give their press conference there; they were subsequently arrested and deported back to Paris." - perhaps a brief mention that Spain, at the time, was francoist? There's also some syntax issues - "against the planned execution"?Brigade Piron (talk) 08:21, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"In 1977, Italian newspaper Corriere della sera asked Foucault to write a column for them." cite please.
The Georges Dumézil tribute could profitably be moved away from its current position to the paragraph above where there are similar tributes? It doesn't seem quite right after a discussion of music and clothing preferences!
The paragraph "Politically, Foucault remained a leftist throughout his life..." could do with at least one more reference, particularly to the first bits.
"Foucault explores theory, criticism, and psychology with reference to the texts of Raymond Roussel, one of the first notable of experimental writers." - cite please!
Consider including portal:sociology in the see also section ({{portal|sociology}})

That's all for now.Brigade Piron (talk) 08:46, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Since a GA can be re-assessed and have its status revoked quite easily, I think it would be wise to consider the views and criticisms of the three editors who have expressed their concerns above. I also dont think the article should be necessarily quickfailed - if the nominator is willing to do the substantial work needed to bring it up to GA standard. As for your statement that the article is first and foremost a biographical article I would counter this: encyclopedia articles should include the information that readers expect them to include. I dont think very many people look up Foucault to find out when he taught at which university, but very many look him up to find out about the main aspects of his thought. Secondly is the notability argument - his thought is what makes him notable, not the events of his personal and professional life.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 12:31, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I accept your points absolutely, Maunus, but I disagree that biographical detail is less important that notable contributions, theories etc. per se. If you compare this with other GA-standard articles about writers, thinkers, poets, philosophers etc., you'll see that biography is what is important to an article of this scope. Take Maya Angelou, for example, as an FA which does an admirable job of dealing with her as a person, as well as a producer-of-thoughts. There is certainly no reason why a more detailed, parallel "Foucault theory and thought" (or words to that effect) cannot complement it. I await the nom's comments. Brigade Piron (talk) 13:05, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am not saying that there should be no biography, of course the main events of Foucaults life should be covered. BUt if you note the article on Maya Angelou one section describes her life and the subsequent four sections, including the legacy and influence section which is the same length as the biography section, covers her work. I think that would be an excellent balance between biography and work for this article too. Also note that there is a very different situation between Angelou and Foucault, because the former is notable for writing autobiographies the second for writing philosophical works. Obviously the biography section is more relevant to the former.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 13:36, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@JJARichardson: are you going to comment? Brigade Piron (talk) 07:42, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I realize that I've made a mistake in nominating this article so would like to withdraw my nomination. I hope this review provides a guideline on where the article needs improvements. JJARichardson (talk) 11:40, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GA failed per nom's comments and other user's concerns. Brigade Piron (talk) 13:26, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]