Talk:Wendy McElroy

message: I remember her title being "individualist feminist". Why does it now say "right-wing feminist"? How is she right-wing? From her works, she always seemed to be a left-leaning libertarian to me, and she herself identifies as an anarchist. She is not a traditionalist or a conservative in any way. On the contrary, she has fought all her life against those concepts. She is in favor of a welfare state, since she has stated her support for state-funded shelters for men multiple times. How does that make her "right-wing"? What sources were used to call her "right-wing"? 2.86.21.247 (talk) 16:01, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Right-Wing?

message: I (Bill Bell) wrote to McElroy about the question of her nationality and the following is the record of the transaction.
------
 Thanks for giving me a link Bill. I am, indeed, Canadian -- a fact by
 birth and by residence, which I do not mind being publicized. 
 Cheers,
 mac
 
 At 01:06 PM 8/18/03 -0400, you wrote:
 >
 >
 >-------- Original Message --------
 >Subject: Wikipedia: your attitude toward your own nationality
 >Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 10:32:57 -0400
 >From: Bill Bell <[address redacted by Tamfang (talk) 18:50, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Wendy McElroy is an Individualist Feminist, a new group who (amongst other things) argue for traditional female and male roles. iFeminists are considered anti-feminist by other feminists, and Wendy McElroy is well known for her attacks on the feminist movement.
I removed this paragraph after attempting to edit it to a more NPOV status because I don't think it is providing factual information.  While the Ifeminism that McElroy associates herself with is very problematic and certainly poses itself in opposition to mainstream feminism, I don't think it is true to say that it argues for traditional female and male roles per se.  Further, not all feminists consider ifeminists anti-feminist, and while McElroy does heap a great deal of abuse on other feminists I think there needs to be more delineation on exactly which feminists she attacks.  Perhaps it would be more fruitful to create a criticism section explaining the view of many feminists that Ifeminism is not a form of feminism but rather a counter-feminist movement whose relation to feminism is something akin to, say, the anarcho-capitalist relation to anarchism (another ideology that McElroy advocates) and thus express their concern that ifeminism is subverting actual feminist values.  Kev 15:37, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Great job Sam, you just reinserted a dubious edit and made the text redundant to boot.  On a bit of a crusade, are we?  Kev 22:07, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed paragraph 

message: Can someone provide a link to her column on fox news? It is mentioned, but not provided. Two-Bit Sprite 18:41, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not sure that they still publish her.  I was talking to her last month.  I should have asked her.  I also took some pictures that I may put up here.  I hope she doesn't care.  I don't see many recent pictures of her on the web.  But she did see me taking them of her.  --Kalmia 06:55, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I found the link and put it up.  --Kalmia 07:44, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  column on fox news 

message: Shall we remove the "anarcho-capitalist" category? See http://www.wendymcelroy.com/news.php?extend.1321 EVCM (talk) 02:34, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This statement is not incompatible with anarcho-capitalism. Most anarcho-capitalist would allow noncapitalistic solutions, as far as they would be voluntary. Some would exactly agree with her, except they would prefer as they primary label "anarcho-capitalist", to mark that they accept some types of property (as firms), some other anarchists do not accept. Conr.PL (talk) 22:54, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anarcho-capitalist category 

message: Wendy McElroy's views go beyond applied politics.  I am changing the heading to Theoretical Politics but welcome input on other more accurate headings.
I'm also subdividing this section because her views are complex and far-reaching. Roger6r (talk) 02:10, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Political Views 

message: should be added to article76.218.104.120 (talk) 11:31, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Her position on global warming controversy 

message: Could we have a different picture of McElroy? I saw her speak recently, and she looks nothing like this photo. It may be her, but it kind of defeats the purpose of identification if it does not resemble the real thing.Artimaean (talk) 04:48, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: New Picture?

message: To add or not to add. EIN (talk) 17:03, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category:Anarcha-feminists 

message: I feel there should surely be at least some mention of the seemingly legitimate claims that substantial amounts of her writing were plagiarized from George H Smith [e.g. http://www.amazon.com/review/R23OEN6VENRS3D]. 105.236.103.12 (talk) 02:05, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plagiarism Controversy 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Wendy McElroy. 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://archive.is/20120629182137/http://www.zetetics.com/mac/xxx/ to http://www.zetetics.com/mac/xxx/
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) 19:17, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: , where? I count one secondary source, and it's an opinion piece from a conservative nonprofit's blog, not a reliable, secondary source. Redirection is a valid alternative to deletion. czar 01:27, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll work on it. E.g., I think she is WP:N and the article simply needs the refs to show. A bare redirect is not enough to give the reader useful information.  – S. Rich (talk) 01:30, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  Go for it czar 02:10, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

text: As explained in the edit summary, this article had been written almost entirely from primary source citations, which were not corrected. This edit reintroduces all of them. If you have secondary sources, now would be the time to produce them. czar 12:40, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sourcing 

message: :
Became?  The footnote links to a blog post (dated Sunday 01 March 2015) containing the phrase "our disassociation in 1988".  That in turn links to a post by her husband containing the phrase "her breaking off all contact with George in 1991."
I knew Smith in about 1994–6, and he had nothing good to say about McElroy then.  Did they work together again later?? —Tamfang (talk) 07:48, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wendy and George