Talk:Jacques-Alain Miller
Latest comment: 5 years ago by Community Tech bot in topic A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
 | Hurly-Burly was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 7 February 2018 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Jacques-Alain Miller. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
WikiProject class rating edit
This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 03:49, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
A highly defficient entry edit
Miller is a very controversial person, almost as Lacan. He has been often accused of appropriating his father-in-law's writings and making himself the sole authority to interpret and publish them, of aping Lacan's obscure style or even making him more obscure (if such a thing is possible). None of these is mentioned. Why? A Wikipedia entry which ignores the widespread criticism against such a controversial figure gives a highly biased and distorted account, a gross disservice to the community. Elitzur (talk) 04:16, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
- Dear Elitzur, Thank you for your comment. Your protest would be more compelling if you could provide sourced quotes. The article as it currently stands includes a sourced reference to Lacan's attribution of "sole authority" to Miller. This matter was more recently contested in a French law court. The judge ruled in favour of Miller. Regarding "obscurity", Miller's reputation is, on the contrary, one of great clarity. In general, WP profiles of living persons should avoid unsourced attacks on matters of "style". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Refusecollection (talk • contribs) 13:42, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
- Honestly, that's absurdly dismissive. Anyone with passing familiarity with Miller's history knows about the controversies which have always surrounding him, his conflicts with other psychoanalysts and academic peers, and disputes about the Seminar series. The article is a whitewash, and rather than asking an editor to demonstrate that fact, what we need is some informed editing to create a balanced article.KD Tries Again (talk) 22:23, 9 June 2013 (UTC)KD Tries Again
- If I understood Elitzur correctly, and I'm perfectly willing to be shown that I didn't, he/she was protesting re: "sole authority" and "clarity". The further controversies you mention may well deserve a place here, but until they are specified, it is impossible to say. The article as it currently stands is a product of the work of several editors, myself included. I have no idea who the other authors are and have never had any contact with them. As with any WP article, feel free to add sourced references or dispute the accuracy of the existing items. The ball's in your court. Refusecollection (talk) 23:39, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
just one example edit
A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion edit
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:11, 27 January 2019 (UTC)