Talk:George William Foote

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles

Skepticism Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled edit

Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Bradlaugh was a Neo-Malthusian, as was Annie Besant, before she became a Theosophist and recanted. Bradlaugh's focus was on birth control, and was quite different from the middle-class Malthusian argument that led to the repeal of outdoor relief. Many of Foote's fellow "anti-Bradlaughites" (like Holyoake) pretended to be shocked by the candidness of the Neo-Malthusian program, especially Charles Knowlton's Fruits of Philosophy[1] -- but I have trouble seeing GW Foote this way, given the contents of The Freethinker. Dan Allosso (talk) 21:02, 23 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

I think that's fair enough. As the article makes clear, of course, the birth control issue was just one of several issues behind the split. --Dannyno (talk) 14:37, 25 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

"passed away" edit

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I note that "passed away" was recently, for about the fourth time, changed to "died" in a good-faith attempt to apply a rule about euphemisms. Could I appeal for people trying to rid Wikipedia of euphemisms to check the context of what they are changing? In this case "passed away" is what appears in the original source. --Dannyno (talk) 17:38, 19 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

Add topic