Talk:Michael Noer (editor)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Michael Noer (editor) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

It is requested that an image or photograph of Michael Noer (editor) be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

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

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

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.

Journalism Low‑importance

	Journalism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism 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.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

Does anyone have a list of other things this person has written besides his misogynist articles? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.197.175.219 (talk • contribs) 07:41, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Like the wiki says, people have failed to actually address the points raised by the article, and you're no different. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.162.84.74 (talk • contribs) 01:34, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

OK, we don't need the polemic - this guy's words speak for themselves. Time to tone it down a bit. EdC 22:43, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia shouldn't be a place to trash semi-notable people, it's not encyclopedic what editorials some journalist wrote that got blogged some places. 207.170.200.19 23:33, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If the ensuing controversy motivates the publisher (a major magazine) to quickly pull the article (and another one by the same writer as well) off their site, I'd think it would be. --Soultaco 20:50, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is this guy even notable enough for his own Wikipedia entry? Seems like it violates a couple things in WP:NOT —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.14.106.170 (talk • contribs) 19:52, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

What does it violate? I don't see anything in your link that would apply to it. This page might become a battleground, at which point it should be edited, blocked or removed by someone more familiar with Wikipedia than, well, anyone who's commenting anonymously like us. But that hasn't happened yet; it's a Wikipedia entry about a semi-public figure who's attracted some attention. If topics like [[1]] are worth pages, then a real-life controversial author certainly is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.92.144.208 (talk • contribs) 03:11, 25 August 2006

Why is there political correctness that keeps removing the observation that the criticism of his article has ignored the point of his article?

possibly because that's a discussion on the article, not the person who wrote it. 69.251.60.112 18:43, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blatant POV, irrelevance, etc.

How has this not gotten some kind of label?

"The article attracted a great deal of controversy among readers and bloggers."

This is quite non-specific. More over, the controversy is mentioned yet instead of noted what exactly it was about, it just goes over Noer's article and says "there was controversy". That is just redundant.

"Corcoran’s rebuttal was intentionally absent of any scientific basis, but rather a personal reflection intended to dull Noer's article in the face of controversy."

Not only does this not make any sense but it is POV. It does not reflect her actual criticism, not any at all in fact, and it decides it was only to dull the controversy.

"However, we never heard from her supposedly "happily married" husband, an interesting footnote to a subject on the benefits to males in this sort of arrangement."

This just instigating. The "supposedly" is POV as is "interesting" and the suggestion that the piece she wrote was only about how it should benefit males.

"It contained all of the study names and academic references that gave Noer's article teeth."

POV whether or not that artciel had teeth is up to the reader. Whether the citations count as teeth is up to the reader. Whether it has any substance and if that should be symbolized as "teeth" or "legs" or "an edge" is up to the reader.

"In the face of female reader complaints, Forbes later apologized to readers:"

POV. "Complaints" is emotive.

I'm changing it a bit and adding some citations and links. NeoApsara