Talk:Michael Watts (geographer)

message: Tried to reformat this, however, I am not sure which format is being used to cite the publications at the bottom of the article, as well, I am not quite sure which way these kind of publications are cited in this field/in Wikipedia.  I am inclined to use MLA for this kinda stuff, but I'd like to hear someone else's opinion.  The current form seems kinda strange.
-Yizzerin 23:54, May 17, 2004 (UTC)
==='Famous' Geography Professors, or Vanity Publishing?===
A simple question: what is the criterion governing the inclusion of this individual in Wikipedia, and what is the relation of the writer (or writers) to the subject of this entry? Isn't there a danger that this kind of entry becomes little more than a form of vanity publishing.... 18 June 2006
A good question: who wrote this entry, and why? 17 July 2006
This article could be written better so it doesn't appear to be a vanity post.  However, I believe Michael Watts deserves inclusion as an entry.  He is a major figure within Geography and the broader field of political ecology.  His work Silent Violence is often considered one of the first works of this sort.  He is also one of the few geographers whose work is widely read and recognized across other disciplines.  I have no personal relationship with Dr. Watts, nor have I ever even met him, although I have read a lot of his work...Aug. 4, 2006
Believing that someone 'deserves' an entry is not actually an explanation of why such a person has one. I think that my friend Fred, who is kind to his dogs and children, 'deserves' an entry, but no one (rightly) would accept this as a valid reason. There is currently far too much puffery where obscure academics are concerned, and it is important to know who wrote it, and why. 4 August 2006
Since I am just about to write a biography of him for an encyclopaedia, I would say his fame deserves mention in Wikipedia. If anything, for geographical contributions, and for being extraordinarily knowledeable (I have met him). If in doubt see David Harvey entry for why some geographers transcend academia and reach into public debate. 24 Aug 06
There speaks a true client, tasked with spreading the 'fame' of his/her master. Why don't you get up off your knees ('I have met him' - and no doubt he turned water into wine, and blessed you in between miracles) and look at the academic world (and perhaps the world itself) a bit more critically. BN, 13 Sept 2006
Is the writer of the last but one observation the same person who wrote the following words in a review of a book: ‘the theoretical mastery of its editors…[the book] is important and valuable, and the editors and contributors are to be congratulated on a fine volume. It will carve out a vital place for geographers involved in these debates and be remembered for years as a benchmark text that offers significant breakthroughs for political ecology.’ Guess who is one of the editors of that book… 17 September 2006
Sure I wrote that review - so what? no different to what most reviewers offered of a ten-year old book.  it was right, too, and the book went into 2nd edn. and has sold loads.  i've neither been taught by, nor had much personal interaction with, anybody i've edited.
Why are you, a geographer, writing so many fawning pieces (book reviews, wikipedia entries) about senior people in the discipline? If you don't want to be regarded as a client, then don't act like one. Whether or not you have been taught by (or know) the people you write so uncritically about is beside the point. To be a client of someone it is not necessary to have been taught by him/her. 8/10/06
As a postscript to these comments, those interested should compare the highly uncritical entry written by the above geographer about (predictably) another geographer -'Stuart E. Corbridge' - in the book Key Thinkers on Space and Place, with two highly critical reviews by non-geographers of a book about India co-authored by the same Stuart E. Corbridge. One appeared in the Journal of Development Studies, vol. 38, no. 1 (October, 2001), and the other in the Journal of Peasant Studies, vol. 29, no. 1 (October, 2001).
On closer inspection, 75% of the items listed under 'books by Watts' are in fact edited texts, or volumes to which others have contributed substantially. His list of articles is not that impressive either, most being very short pieces. All in all, a fairly average cv. Why, then, this entry? 18/10/06
What's Watt? Isn't one of the editors of Key Thinkers on (Outer) Space and (Peyton) Place a geographer called Hubbard - L. 'Ron' Hubbard? Jacques the Quipper, 27th October 2006
Shhh! You'll scare away the geographer who composed this entry, going about the worthwhile task of spreading the fame of his senior colleagues. Naughty, very naughty - not nice at all to interrupt such good work. 2/11/06
Another fairly silly debate. Who is "notable" within a discipline is generally best-determined by people in that discipline, so it should be no surprise to see geographers writing the entries. As it happens, Watts is well-known outside geography, too (well-enough that I know who he is, anyway, and find it quite useful to have his basic bio up on Wikipedia). And really, if you're so concerned that Wikipedia has too many articles on it (is it going to fill up? Are the servers groaning under the weight of these 1K text files?), might not the endless streams of articles on minor comic book characters, singles by obscure singers, and other pop culture effluvia not be a better place to start? That would be silly of course--and so is this odd campaign against academics. 131.111.8.98 16:39, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: A simple question: what is the criterion governing the inclusion of this individual in Wikipedia, and what is the relation of the writer (or writers) to the subject of this entry? Isn't there a danger that this kind of entry becomes little more than a form of vanity publishing.... 18 June 2006
A good question: who wrote this entry, and why? 17 July 2006
This article could be written better so it doesn't appear to be a vanity post.  However, I believe Michael Watts deserves inclusion as an entry.  He is a major figure within Geography and the broader field of political ecology.  His work Silent Violence is often considered one of the first works of this sort.  He is also one of the few geographers whose work is widely read and recognized across other disciplines.  I have no personal relationship with Dr. Watts, nor have I ever even met him, although I have read a lot of his work...Aug. 4, 2006
Believing that someone 'deserves' an entry is not actually an explanation of why such a person has one. I think that my friend Fred, who is kind to his dogs and children, 'deserves' an entry, but no one (rightly) would accept this as a valid reason. There is currently far too much puffery where obscure academics are concerned, and it is important to know who wrote it, and why. 4 August 2006
Since I am just about to write a biography of him for an encyclopaedia, I would say his fame deserves mention in Wikipedia. If anything, for geographical contributions, and for being extraordinarily knowledeable (I have met him). If in doubt see David Harvey entry for why some geographers transcend academia and reach into public debate. 24 Aug 06
There speaks a true client, tasked with spreading the 'fame' of his/her master. Why don't you get up off your knees ('I have met him' - and no doubt he turned water into wine, and blessed you in between miracles) and look at the academic world (and perhaps the world itself) a bit more critically. BN, 13 Sept 2006
Is the writer of the last but one observation the same person who wrote the following words in a review of a book: ‘the theoretical mastery of its editors…[the book] is important and valuable, and the editors and contributors are to be congratulated on a fine volume. It will carve out a vital place for geographers involved in these debates and be remembered for years as a benchmark text that offers significant breakthroughs for political ecology.’ Guess who is one of the editors of that book… 17 September 2006
Sure I wrote that review - so what? no different to what most reviewers offered of a ten-year old book.  it was right, too, and the book went into 2nd edn. and has sold loads.  i've neither been taught by, nor had much personal interaction with, anybody i've edited.
Why are you, a geographer, writing so many fawning pieces (book reviews, wikipedia entries) about senior people in the discipline? If you don't want to be regarded as a client, then don't act like one. Whether or not you have been taught by (or know) the people you write so uncritically about is beside the point. To be a client of someone it is not necessary to have been taught by him/her. 8/10/06
As a postscript to these comments, those interested should compare the highly uncritical entry written by the above geographer about (predictably) another geographer -'Stuart E. Corbridge' - in the book Key Thinkers on Space and Place, with two highly critical reviews by non-geographers of a book about India co-authored by the same Stuart E. Corbridge. One appeared in the Journal of Development Studies, vol. 38, no. 1 (October, 2001), and the other in the Journal of Peasant Studies, vol. 29, no. 1 (October, 2001).
On closer inspection, 75% of the items listed under 'books by Watts' are in fact edited texts, or volumes to which others have contributed substantially. His list of articles is not that impressive either, most being very short pieces. All in all, a fairly average cv. Why, then, this entry? 18/10/06
What's Watt? Isn't one of the editors of Key Thinkers on (Outer) Space and (Peyton) Place a geographer called Hubbard - L. 'Ron' Hubbard? Jacques the Quipper, 27th October 2006
Shhh! You'll scare away the geographer who composed this entry, going about the worthwhile task of spreading the fame of his senior colleagues. Naughty, very naughty - not nice at all to interrupt such good work. 2/11/06
Another fairly silly debate. Who is "notable" within a discipline is generally best-determined by people in that discipline, so it should be no surprise to see geographers writing the entries. As it happens, Watts is well-known outside geography, too (well-enough that I know who he is, anyway, and find it quite useful to have his basic bio up on Wikipedia). And really, if you're so concerned that Wikipedia has too many articles on it (is it going to fill up? Are the servers groaning under the weight of these 1K text files?), might not the endless streams of articles on minor comic book characters, singles by obscure singers, and other pop culture effluvia not be a better place to start? That would be silly of course--and so is this odd campaign against academics. 131.111.8.98 16:39, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: 'Famous' Geography Professors, or Vanity Publishing?

message: I know there is a policy on biographies on wikipedia to avoid libel, so I wanted to bring up accusations of plagiarism against the Retort collective (of which Watts is a member) here first. 
These authors accuse Retort of plagiarism in their articles and the book Afflicted Powers. This claim has been made publicly, so I'm not sure if its acceptable to include here or not. It would probably be better suited on a page about the Retort Collective, but I don't believe such a page exists.--Cwhalvor 23:40, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  accusation of plagiarism 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Michael Watts. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100608125026/http://www.ffipp.org/about_us to http://www.ffipp.org/about_us
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:18, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Michael Watts. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090923235124/http://www.versobooks.com/books/nopqrs/r-titles/retort_afflicted_powers.shtml to http://www.versobooks.com/books/nopqrs/r-titles/retort_afflicted_powers.shtml
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:30, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified