Jump to content

Talk:Michel Foucault

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former featured articleMichel Foucault is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on December 7, 2005.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 7, 2005Peer reviewReviewed
February 17, 2005Featured article candidatePromoted
November 19, 2008Featured article reviewDemoted
June 12, 2014Good article nomineeNot listed
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on June 25, 2017, and June 25, 2020.
Current status: Former featured article

Pronunciation of name Comment[edit]

How is Foucault's name pronounced? Normal French pronunciation would be /miˈʃɛl fuˈko/ but I have seen web sites that say it's /ˈfuko/. Did he alter the proonunciation when he lived in Scandinavia and Germany, or are those sites simply wrong?— Preceding unsigned comment added by ABehrens (talkcontribs) 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Genealogy as historical method[edit]

The section headed "Genealogy as historical method" makes no reference to genealogy as historical method.

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 November 2023[edit]

Change pronouns of Judith Butler from 'she' to they' in section 'The body and sexuality' Smcd123 (talk) 08:59, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: no reason given for the proposed change. M.Bitton (talk) 20:17, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved
Justified by the main article on Butler, but for simplicity I just edited it to avoid pronoun use there. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 02:42, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 January 2024[edit]

CHANGE: In April 1966, Gallimard published Foucault's Les Mots et les Choses [fr] (Words and Thing)

TO: In April 1966, Gallimard published Foucault's Les Mots et les Choses [fr] (Words and Things) Malte Egon G (talk) 12:41, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 14:43, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

inaccuracies and failure to mention homophobia as a primary reason in "views on underage sex" topic[edit]

The petition mentioned in the section on his views on age of consent shouldnt be there and is blatantly misrepresented. That petition was to make the age of consent for homosexual sex acts in line with the general age of consent and not far above them and the section makes no sense whatsoever with this fact removed as without this context it says he wanted to lower the age of consent to the age of consent. Its a ridiculous misdirection to claim this as evidence of his opinions on underage sex when its clearly about the homophobic double standard at play. Additionally by definition it makes no sense to claim support for the general age of consent becoming applicable to homosexuals isnt an opinion on underage sex because its about people that are above the age of consent and thus not underage 103.250.118.144 (talk) 04:41, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a source explaining this? At least at a glance, one problem with the section is that it relies extremely heavily on WP:PRIMARY sources, pulling quotes out of a single interview; for something WP:EXCEPTIONAL like this that isn't really appropriate, especially not when we're devoting an entire section to it. So if we had more secondary sources putting this in proper context we could rewrite it to focus on those instead. --Aquillion (talk) 15:38, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
On examination, every citation in the section except one is a WP:PRIMARY cite to a single interview (it was cited under different names and publications three times); and the one remaining source is a Guardian article where Foucault is only mentioned briefly in passing as part of a list of names. I'm not sure this is enough for even a paragraph, but it certainly isn't enough for an entire section - we should try and find secondary sources if we're going to retain this at all. --Aquillion (talk) 15:51, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]