Depression I noticed that in the excellent copyediting Shimeru took out a lot of my equivocations like Wollstonecraft appeared to have depression and other similar phrases Many of those were intentional We do not have a diagnosis of depression for Wollstonecraft it is a speculation that scholars have made knowing that she tried to commit suicide and she wrote many melancholy letters But none of that is definitive  I dont think its really problematic to say Wollstonecraft was plagued by depression True Wollstonecraft was never diagnosed with clinical depression but depression is widely understood outside of a medical context The evidence is pretty conclusive that Wollstonecraft dealt with at least some form of depression considering she attempted suicide twice In the case of her sisters more specific postpartum depression I see that Shimeru left the equivocation intact which is probably a good idea since postpartum depression is a much more clinical term   Thats pretty close to my reasoning  her depression and her fathers violence seem pretty well established by the text which is cited though I admit I havent got the book to hand  If you feel I overstepped with some of the removals go ahead and reinsert them  Theyll probably be pointed out at FA though   One of the reasons I made the point about depression in particular is because all of the biographies I read do so as well But I will not add the equivocation back in if people do not think it is necessary  I think the equivocation is awkward in this case It just seems much too anal to not state the obvious here Plus I have a reference for an unequivocating quote so Ill reference that   Im afraid that I think that the equivocation is essential in this case It is not obvious to say that someone two hundred years ago had depression when all we have left are their letters It is incredibly difficult to diagnose depression today Also your quotation uses the word depression in a broad sense not in the clinical sense so I do not think that you can use it to support the idea that Wollstonecraft had depression I do not view cautious and careful scholarship as being anal   Why would we not also be using it in a broad sense I dont think its necessary or desirable for us to hazard guesses or echo other sources guesses about whether or not Wollstonecraft may have suffered from clinical depression But I dont see anything wrong with saying that she suffered depression in the normal sense of the word Perhaps there is a way to rephrase it without using the word depression or do you think it is important that we address the issue of clinical depression in the article In case your wondering why were so antiequivocation it has to do with the featured article criteria specifically the brilliant prose criteria In practice this criteria means that reviewing editors will be harsh on equivocationheavy writing This is to offset Wikipedias natural tendency towards equivocating everything although this is more typically due to neutral point of view issues rather than historical uncertainty Obviously we cant make unsubstantiated claims to make the writing more compelling but in this case I think it is fair to use depression in the broader sense I would be interested however in seeing what Todd says on the matter   Here is what Todd says on the issue in the footnotes for Chapter  I have used the words depressed and depression anachronistically to refer to Wollstonecraft Depression in fact became a current term only in the midnineteenth century when it came to be used for the lowness of spirits felt by the sick By  it had achieved its modern meaning of a general sinking of the spirits I have used melancholy and melancholia also especially when Wollstonecraft seemed in part to be celebrating her condition