Talk:Derrick Jensen

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
Socrates
Philosophy Portal
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Philosophy, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
High This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale.
align="left" This article is part of WikiProject Gender Studies. This WikiProject aims to improve the quality of articles dealing with gender studies and to remove systematic gender bias from Wikipedia. If you would like to participate in the project, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.
??? This article has not yet received a rating.
Derrick Jensen was featured as the Anarchism portal selected article for 2005.

Contents

[edit] POV

Someone keeps adding POV stuff to this article, adding descriptions like "all-too-real" and deleting unflattering material about this fringe figure whose principal agenda these days is promoting the detonation of dams, cell phone towers, and elected officials. If you agree with that, fine, but Wikipedia isn't the place to give makeovers to radicals so they come off like Bill Moyers. JG

-Yeah but it's too bad there is ORIGINAL "pov" stuff in the article, like how he's an "anarchist" (he does not claim this label), and that he is friends with Ward - although they are colleagues, Derrick pointed out recently he's also friends with Joan Baez - why isn't she listed there? This entry serves to paint Jensen in such a light that he is dangerous or an eco-terrorist, and that should be why there are issues with its' "neutrality". Since when does an activist who is interested in protecting Earth get slandered with Johnny-come-lately views of "radicals"? Stupid. This is why Wikipedia is a piece of crap.

nf1

why not let Derrick and other people in wikipedia write their own biographies? TL

JG is simply wrong about my positions, and certainly is in no position to state what my "principal agenda" is these days. Further, I'm not sure that the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism and the Nieman Foundation at Harvard would precisely agree that I am a "fringe figure," else they would not have given The Culture of Make Believe an award as one of three finalists for the Lukas Prize Project Award for Exceptional Works of Nonfiction. I'm also not sure that The Evergreen State College in Olympia, WA would agree either, else the students would not have voted me their commencement speaker last year, nor would the university have invited me. Nor the hundreds of people who routinely pack auditoriums. And so on. It's really clear that JG and perhaps others are really disturbed by what I say. That's fine. But there's no reason for them to distort my views, to disparage me or my work, and, as happened before this most recent round of edits, to put in material that is positively libelous. Having someone who clearly does not understand and who clearly does not like an author's work write the entry for that person makes no sense. It's a really bad idea. Why don't we have me write George Bush's entry? Why don't we have people who hate rap write entries for rap musicians? Why don't we have homophobes write entries for important gay rights activists? It makes no more sense to have someone like JG slant (read destroy) an entry about me than it does to have any of these other possibilities. Derrick Jensen

I've yet to read anything by you (yet) so I've had trouble figuring out what stuff is correct and what isn't. I'll try to find some editors who are more familiar with your work to watch this page as well (I have two in mind). The Ungovernable Force 05:02, 8 August 2006 (UTC)


I was thinking a lot more about this, and I think it really goes to the heart of what wikipedia is trying to accomplish. If the purpose of these entries is to make it so people who have some axe to grind or who don't like someone else's work have an outlet to express that dislike, then that is one thing. But that frankly doesn't seem like a very useful encyclopedia. If you'd like to generate something that gives a reasonably accurate synopsis of an artist's or philosopher's work, I'd be happy to help (including choosing quotes that more accurately exemplify my work). It seems to me that one of the goals of wikipedia would be to give reasonably accurate synopses. Derrick Jensen

I think it would be great if you could contribute some additions or deletions to steer the entry in a more accurate direction. You could type "correction by subject of entry" in the "Edit summary" field (or become a registered user) so contributors know that a contribution has your full approval. If you have specific questions for me, I'd be happy to try to answer them on my talk page.
--LC | Talk 22:45, 8 August 2006 (UTC)


This article is currently in a pretty poor state - much of it reads more like a eulogy than a dispassionate, objective account of Derrick Jensen's work and any existing commentary on it. I get the impression that the article is actually endorsing many of his controversial views, which is not what Wikipedia is supposed to do. Nor should it contain any material that reads like a hatchet job (if there's anything like that that I missed on a quick reading). It should simply be factual, though it can report in a factual way on what notable criticisms have been made publicly at this stage. Derrick J. has offered to help, but of course that potentially creates a conflict of interest if he actually edits the page (unless any edits are restricted to non-contentious material or to removing any defamatory etc allegations that appear from time to time). We discourage people editing their own articles, though I personally have no problem if all that is added is uncontentious factual material. However, the best way he could help - and this is what we actually encourage - would be by using this talk page to draw our attention to any significant matters of fact that are not currently covered in the article. Metamagician3000 23:33, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
I should add that if any libellous material appears and is brought to my attention I will take a dim view of it. As an admin I can take action against anonymous users who are here only to defame people they don't like - but I'd need to see a clear-cut case, rather than getting dragged into something murky. If false and defamatory material is added at any point, DJ has every right to remove it himself, as does anybody else. Metamagician3000 23:43, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
Meanwhile, I've done a thorough cleanup of the article and am now much happier with it. It should now be clear what Jensen says, and that it is being reported neutrally by Wikipedia (not supported or advocated). Any factual corrections or elaborations welcomed, though I still respectfully suggest, in accordance with normal Wikipedia practice, that anything at all contentious and non-urgent be put here on the talk page if it is from DJ himself. Metamagician3000 05:29, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
Good cleanup. It looks like there aren't any more problems with anons though, but it would be good to still keep an eye on it. Ungovernable ForceGot something to say? 06:37, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
I carried on the cleanup and therefore will remove the 'wikify' tag .. i think the 'verify' tag can also go, but im happy to see what other people think first Mujinga 13:23, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Verify

This article needs citations. Stat. I've transwiki'd the quotes to Wikiquote, fixed the image format problem, and removed the POV tag, as I don't see anything particularly POV about the article. If anyone wants to re-add it, I suggest commenting on the talk page first. Regards, - FrancisTyers ยท 20:51, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Persistent Defamatory Vandalism

The revisions made by IPs 72.72.130.247 and 67.161.16.209 on 14 August and 17 August 2006 qualify as libel, and will continue to be removed in accordance with the Wikipedia:Biography of living persons policy. If the vandalism continues, I believe there are grounds for locking this entry to registered users. As for the documented quotations within the libelous revisions (from HopeDance and CounterPunch), I will add links to the source web pages where said quotes can be found. Readers can judge them for themselves, in context. If contributors feel criticism of Jensen should be articulated somewhere within the entry, they should first discuss the issues on this discussion page (excluding defamatory accusations, per Wikipedia policy). However, since there is no published criticism of Jensen that I am aware of, I doubt that the required citations would be available. LC | Talk 03:07, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jensen, more than an anarcho-primitivist?

The fact that Jensen writes about misogyny and racism makes him more of an anarcho-primitivist author. These topics are not just related to anarcho-primitivism, they are a part of it. I suggest you read the article "Place the blame where it belongs", by collective green anarchy. http://www.insurgentdesire.org.uk/placeblame.htm Maziotis 19:20, 6 December 2006 (UTC)