Talk:H. L. A. Hart

message: This is a new entry.  It is very important that the entry be named H.L.A. Hart rather than Herbert Hart.  Hart used his initials in preference to his first name throughout his academic career.  He is known only as H.L.A. Hart and not as Herbert Hart.  There is another famous legal theorist from the same period named Herbert Hart, and using that name will cause considerable confusion. 207.88.181.2
:No problem. Herbert Hart is a redirect for now and can be disambiguated later if anyone wants to write about the other Herbert Hart. Angela 18:31, 6 Sep 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: It would be nice if someone could find a suitable photo of Hart for this article.
: Regrettably, I am only able to locate unfree images.  If anyone has a snapshot, even, of Prof. Hart, other than a copyrighted book jacket image, placing it here would be most appreciated. --Brad Patrick (talk) 20:11, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photograph 

message: Upon reading this page, I was very surprised to discover that [[[H.L.A. Hart]]] was a homosexual, until I made the further discovery that he was married with four children and that it is some unnamed, unsourced "biographers" who claim that he's gay. I'm not going to do anything about it because doing that would involve a revert war and most likely some nasty attacks on my own motives. I would like it if someone would look into this and source the claim. Biographers sometimes make scandalous claims to generate attention, or base their speculation on untrustworthy sources; if you don't believe me think of Albert Goldman's scandalous biography of John Lennon, which ironically enough accused him of homosexuality (add Lennon to the list of LGBT Britons!) Allon FambrizziAllon Fambrizzi
I don't know where you get the idea that it has been merely "unnamed, unsourced 'biographers'" alleging that Hart was gay. My source was a Chronicle of Higher Education article; I take the Chronicle to be a source as reputable as any. Moreover, it's obviously insufficient to say simply that other people have wrongly been described as homosexual; this says practically nothing about the fact in question, and gets you nowhere. You could cast doubt on anything like that. In light of the deletion, I guess it should seem apt that the cited article is about how people have been upset by and so tried to repress the idea that certain philosophers were in fact gay.
Malaikhanh (12/24/07)
Perhaps, then, a caveat should be placed in Hart's primary article concerning his alleged homosexuality. Simply note that this is a point of dispute. Dionysiaca  —Preceding comment was added at 00:29, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comment 

message: Hello, someone added a  to the sentence regarding speculation about Jenifer's infidelities.  This is included in the cited biography Nightmare and Nobel Dream.  A summary, including information about the speculation, is here. --best, kevin [kzollman][talk] 18:38, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wife's infidelities 

message: On 9 August 2016 User:Debresser queried the relevance of the tale about Sarah Churchill's diaries.  The article claims: "Hart's wit and humanity are demonstrated by the fact that he particularly enjoyed the passage where Sarah tells that John had been away for a long time, had arrived suddenly, and "enjoyed me straight way in his boots"."  I fail to grasp how this notably demonstrates either wit or humanity.  It is on the level of "undergraduate humour", perhaps that of a Whitehall farce (like "Home from the war!" sketches) and possibly appropriate (around that time) to an after-dinner speech.  But I cannot see how it performs a useful function here.  It isn't even a joke by Hart.  And his humanity is surely better demonstrated from his moral views and occasional morally related activities (which I think are mentioned in Lacey's book).  Now, "I like a joke as much as the next man", but to me this tale just lowers the intellectual level of the article.  Let's dismiss it.  Wikiain (talk) 04:51, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Debresser (talk) 11:35, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Debresser, okthough I think you might have waited a day or two for other views.  Given that deletion, the remaining sentence about the diaries doesn't seem to have any importance and I suppose should also be removed. Wikiain (talk) 13:43, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  In view of the low number of participants on this talkpage, as witnessed among others by the fact that you started your post in this section with "On 9 August 2016", I decided that a consensus of 2 is probably the most we'll get here. Debresser (talk) 18:38, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: When I made the same proposal a couple of years back, it was opposed.  However, you have deleted the other sentence as I suggested and I think the article is improved.  Anyone can restore the material if they wishand/or note it and use it after a college dinner. Cheers. Wikiain (talk) 00:06, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Sarah Churchill diaries tale