Talk:Émilie du Châtelet
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, which collaborates on articles related to physics. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale. [FAQ] | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received an importance rating within physics. | |
|
Comments:
|
||
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ] | ||
It looks like this entire article is just a rip from another website [1]. Did the author of that article give permission to do this? WoodenTaco 21:07, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] A History of Western Society
This page is definitely taken from pg. 603 of HMCO's "A History of Western Society" I have marked this page for requiring cleanup. Xiamcitizen 06:36, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
- I wrote the first paragraph (in two stages – see History) in response to the complaint at "Physicist?", below, that there wasn't enough in the page about her scientific contributions. It is my own work. I don't argue in support of the rest of it (which could perhaps do with a bit of pruning anyway). Moonraker88 08:07, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
- To assist, some of my sources for para 1: Online essay from Public Broadcast Service ; Encylopædia Britannica 1998 edition; The scientist that history forgot ; The scientist whom history forgot. There were others. Moonraker88 09:15, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
- The first paragraph does not appear to be taken from the text, thanks for the clarification, Moon. This section, however, does. Xiamcitizen 07:33, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- I've given the section you were complaining of a copyedit and broadened its sources. I don't know the work you believe to be the original source, so I can't say for certain whether or not this will satisfy your concerns. --Moonraker88 14:50, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
- The first paragraph does not appear to be taken from the text, thanks for the clarification, Moon. This section, however, does. Xiamcitizen 07:33, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- To assist, some of my sources for para 1: Online essay from Public Broadcast Service ; Encylopædia Britannica 1998 edition; The scientist that history forgot ; The scientist whom history forgot. There were others. Moonraker88 09:15, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Languages
The article says :" by the age of twelve she was fluent in Latin, Italian, French, Greek, and German." I find it unremarkable that someone French is reasonably fluent in French by age 12. Is this a typo for another language? Tonywalton 
| Talk 21:32, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
- It needs to be included, whether or not you think it is remarkable. Gene Nygaard 22:10, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
- For "remarkable", read "notable". Or are you of the opinion that every native speaker of a language is notable in WP terms, so should have the fact noted in their article, for being able to speak it? Tonywalton | Talk 22:25, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
- Good point Tony :) Maybe the original author meant to say English -- anyway I should check it but pretty sure she was fluent in English. Lisa 13:24, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
- For "remarkable", read "notable". Or are you of the opinion that every native speaker of a language is notable in WP terms, so should have the fact noted in their article, for being able to speak it? Tonywalton
[edit] Châtelet's name
Is it correct to refer to the subject of this article throughout as Émilie. For comparison, her father is refered to as Breteuil rather than Louis-Auguste. It seems a little sexist that Châtelet is refered to by her personal name. Now, one problem with calling her Châtelet is that she was only known as such from the time of her marriage. However, I think it is possible to describe her as Breteuil (or Émilie de Breteuil, to distinguish her from her father) in the section on her early life. --Gareth Hughes 20:29, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Emilie's father
There is either an error in this article or in the article for Louis-Charles-Auguste le Tonnelier de Breteuil, listed here as her father; if you follow the link to his article you find that he was born in 1730 while his "daughter" was born in 1706. Do we have the wrong Louis-Charles-Auguste?
[edit] Physicist?
The beginning of this article mentions that she was a physicist, yet the only two sections about her focus on her early life and her social life. Perhaps somebody could say something about her translation + interpretation of Newton and her other work. And maybe something about the limitations for women philosophes in the Enlightenment (not allowed in the Paris Academy of Science, etc). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nitwitpicker (talk • contribs).
- Agree. I think today her role as a scientist is more important than her marriages and love affairs. She was a notable scholar way ahead of her time. ←Humus sapiens ну? 08:19, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
-
- I had the same reaction. Although the introduction lists her notable accomplishments, the only sections within this article are regarding her personal life. Much has been written about her scientific dedications, so it seems a gross omission to not embellish upon the bullet points mentioned at the beginning. Also, the context in which she lived made her unique in that she flew in the face of a pervasive misogyny in France and succeeded. I will try to find some concrete information to add.
I wonder if the Voltaire Foundation in Oxford has any useful information?
User: Calibanu 12.48, 03 August 2006
[edit] New biography
There's supposed to be a new book (in English) out about her; I heard an interview with the author, who claimed that she fought a duel at Versailles when she was a teenager... AnonMoos 07:26, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
