Talk:Judith Rich Harris

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] Please rate the article and, if you wish, leave comments here regarding your assessment or the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

I added a good bit of information here (I think Harris is an important if controversial voice in current psychology). Most of it is from The Nuture Assumption Web site, the book itself, and the Newsweek article. I haven’t read No Two Alike yet (it’s just been published), so all the information about this book is from the Monsters and Critics review. I removed the NPOV and stub notices. Please tell me if I have broken some Wikipedia etiquette by doing this (don’t bite the newbie)! Fionah 16:49, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Good stuff! I think removing the POV tag was totally appropriate. There is a nice little blurb in Matt Ridley's Nature via Nurture/The Agile Gene about the irony of her winning a prestigious award for The Nurture Assumption that was named after the guy who threw her out of grad studies, or something like that (memory gone today). Pete.Hurd 16:56, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

I removed some of the clear opinions in the article and rewrote to show that this was just one point of view. --Sprague 05:54, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Much better, I'm going to remove the sectOR tag. Pete.Hurd 06:15, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

I moved the majority of the section on "The Nurture Assumption" over to the article of the same name. The article itself was just a stub, and it seemed the more appropriate place for the information. Good work all of those who contributed to it - it is a well written section. Keithmahoney 21:01, 9 May 2006 (UTC)