Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
All civil discourse (including dissent) is welcomed! ] (]) 03:02, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
All civil discourse (including dissent) is welcomed! ] (]) 03:02, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
:The ] follows the general guidance that article leads should summarize material that is in the main body of the article, where issues are covered in more detail and with more sources. The body text cites multiple sources related to each of the concerns you raise.
:The first claim you challenge, that "academic philosophers have generally ignored or rejected her philosophy" is cited ''in the lead'' to an encyclopedia article in the '']''<ref>{{cite web |url=http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ayn-rand/ |title=Ayn Rand |last1=Badhwar |first1=Neera |last2=Long |first2=Roderick T. |editor-first=Edward N. |editor-last=Zalta |editor-link=Edward N. Zalta |date=Fall 2020 |website=] |access-date=May 3, 2021 |name-list-style=amp |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220324051518/https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ayn-rand/ |archive-date=March 24, 2022 |url-status=live}}</ref> – a recent, peer-reviewed ] source that reflects typical academic attitudes. Additional sources cited in the body text include another encyclopedia,<ref>{{cite book |first=Jenny A. |last=Heyl |chapter=Ayn Rand (1905–1982) |title=A History of Women Philosophers: Contemporary Women Philosophers, 1900–Today |volume=4 |date=1995 |editor-first=Mary Ellen |editor-last=Waithe |location=Boston |publisher=] |isbn=978-0-7923-2807-0 |pages=207–224}}</ref> a collection of academic essays by critics of Rand,<ref>{{cite book |editor-last=Cocks |editor-first=Neil |title=Questioning Ayn Rand: Subjectivity, Political Economy, and the Arts |series=Palgrave Studies in Literature, Culture and Economics |location=Cham, Switzerland |publisher=] |edition=Kindle |date=2020 |isbn=978-3-030-53072-3 |page=11}}</ref>, an academic book about Rand's reception in Eurpoe,<ref>{{cite book |first=Claudia Franziska |last=Brühwiler |title=Out of a Gray Fog: Ayn Rand's Europe |date=2021 |location=Lanham, Maryland |publisher=] |edition=Kindle |isbn=978-1-79363-686-7 |page=27}}</ref>, a book by journalist ],<ref>{{cite book |first=Eric |last=Burns |author-link=Eric Burns |year=2020 |title=1957: The Year that Launched the American Future |location=Lanham, Maryland |publisher=] |isbn=978-1-5381-3995-0 |page=259}}</ref> and others.<ref>{{cite book |last=Murnane |first=Ben |title=Ayn Rand and the Posthuman: The Mind-Made Future |publisher=Palgrave Macmillan |location=Cham, Switzerland |date=2018 |isbn=978-3-319-90853-3 |page=3}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last=Cleary |first=Skye C. |date=June 22, 2018 |title=Philosophy Shrugged: Ignoring Ayn Rand Won't Make Her Go Away |url=https://aeon.co/ideas/philosophy-shrugged-ignoring-ayn-rand-wont-make-her-go-away |access-date=September 2, 2022 |website=] |language=en}}</ref> All these sources make claims of fact about how Rand is typically perceived in academia, and come from eight different authors whose own opinions about her vary.
:Moving on to your second major point, the passage you are quoting never "suggests" an increase in "popularity and influence" since she died; it says that "''academic interest'' in her ideas has grown since her death" (emphasis added). The source cited in the lead is the aforementioned collection of critical essays.<ref>{{cite book |editor-last=Cocks |editor-first=Neil |title=Questioning Ayn Rand: Subjectivity, Political Economy, and the Arts |series=Palgrave Studies in Literature, Culture and Economics |location=Cham, Switzerland |publisher=] |edition=Kindle |date=2020 |isbn=978-3-030-53072-3 |page=15}}</ref> This is also supported in the body by the citation of an academic book by history professor Jennifer Burns,<ref>{{cite book |title=Goddess of the Market: Ayn Rand and the American Right |last=Burns |first=Jennifer |location=New York |publisher=] |year=2009 |isbn=978-0-19-532487-7 |title-link=Goddess of the Market: Ayn Rand and the American Right |pages=295–296}}</ref>, an academic book by ]<ref>{{cite book |title=Ayn Rand |last=Gladstein |first=Mimi Reisel |location=New York |publisher=] |year=2009 |isbn=978-0-8264-4513-1 |series=Major Conservative and Libertarian Thinkers |pages=114–122}}</ref>, and an encyclopedia article.<ref>{{cite book |editor-first=John R. |editor-last=Shook |first1=Gregory |last1=Salmieri |first2=Allan |last2=Gotthelf |author2-link=Allan Gotthelf |chapter=Rand, Ayn (1905–82) |title=The Dictionary of Modern American Philosophers |title-link=The Dictionary of Modern American Philosophers |publisher=] |location=London |year=2005 |isbn=978-1-84371-037-0 |name-list-style=amp |volume=4 |pages=1995–1999}}</ref> Other sources have been cited in past iterations of the article, including an academic book by ],<ref>{{cite book |title=Ayn Rand: The Russian Radical |last=Sciabarra |first=Chris Matthew |author-link=Chris Matthew Sciabarra |location=University Park, Pennsylvania |publisher=Pennsylvania State University Press |year=2013 |edition=2nd |isbn=978-0-271-06374-4 |title-link=Ayn Rand: The Russian Radical}}</ref> and journalism in '']''<ref>{{cite journal|last=Sharlet|first=Jeff|author-link=Jeff Sharlet (writer)|journal=]|url=http://chronicle.com/article/Ayn-Rand-Has-Finally-Caught/20237/|title=Ayn Rand Has Finally Caught the Attention of Scholars|date=April 9, 1999|volume=45|issue=31|pages=A17–A18|access-date=April 15, 2011}}</ref> and '']''.<ref>{{cite magazine|last=McLemee|first=Scott|url=http://linguafranca.mirror.theinfo.org/9909/rand.html|title=The Heirs Of Ayn Rand: Has Objectivism Gone Subjective?|magazine=]|date=September 1999|volume=9|issue=6|pages=45–55|access-date=April 15, 2011|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110515004459/http://linguafranca.mirror.theinfo.org/9909/rand.html|archive-date=May 15, 2011|url-status=live}}</ref> Beyond explicit sourcing, I note that the number of academic books discussing Rand during her lifetime can be counted on the fingers of one hand. In contrast, the article currently cites more than 20 such books published after her death, most of which are from the last 20 years. Also note that the ]-affiliated Ayn Rand Society and '']'' were both founded after her death (facts that are stated and cited in the article).
:Finally, whether her "popularity and influence" is greater or lesser now than during her living heyday is harder to discern (and the article makes no claim about that), but your statement that Rand "is rarely discussed outside of right-wing libertarian circles today" is clearly untrue. I will simply note that the list of sources currently in the article incudes books from the last decade by non-libertarians such as ], ], ], and ], as well as others who do not have WP articles. If I started citing newspaper and magazine articles, the list could break this Talk page.
{{Reflist-talk}}
:In none of these cases are the sources listed exhaustive. More could be provided, but that would probably be ]. --] (]) 07:45, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages'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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Objectivism, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.ObjectivismWikipedia:WikiProject ObjectivismTemplate:WikiProject ObjectivismObjectivism
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Atheism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of atheism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AtheismWikipedia:WikiProject AtheismTemplate:WikiProject AtheismAtheism
Add Atheism info box to all atheism related talk pages (use {{WikiProject Atheism}} or see info box)
Ensure atheism-related articles are members of Atheism by checking whether ] has been added to atheism-related articles – and, where it hasn't, adding it.
Try to expand stubs. Ideas and theories about life, however, are prone to generating neologisms, so some stubs may be suitable for deletion (see deletion process).
State atheism needs a reassessment of its Importance level, as it has little to do with atheism and is instead an article about anti-theist/anti-religious actions of governments.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Misplaced Pages.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers
This article is part of WikiProject Theatre, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of theatre on Misplaced Pages. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.TheatreWikipedia:WikiProject TheatreTemplate:WikiProject TheatreTheatre
This article was reviewed by London Review of Books on 20 May 2009. (Link to review) Comments: "...Reads as though it has been worked over far too much, and like any form of writing that is overcooked it alienates the reader by appearing to be closed off in its own private world of obsession and anxiety." For more information about external reviews of Misplaced Pages articles and about this review in particular, see this page.
Influence on Israeli politicians
An editor has twice attempted to add material about Rand influencing various Israeli political figures. There's nothing inherently wrong with that, but I've reverted the additions twice now because of the poor quality of the sourcing for these claims. Claims about living people need solid sourcing. That means third-party reliable sources for facts (not opinion pieces, blogs, etc.) or an explicit declaration by that person. These sources must actually say that Rand has been an influence on their political thinking. Sources that say they read her novels, identified with a particular character, etc., are not enough to claim political influence. Also, social media posts and interviews are acceptably only for what the person says about themselves, not as sources for claims they make about other people. --RL0919 (talk) 13:59, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
So this means, an article making inferences, such as so-and-so said x, y and z, and Rand said x, y and z, therefore so-and-so was apparently influenced by Rand, does not count and should be treated as speculation. -- Doctorx0079 (talk) 15:12, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
It looks like Ayalet Shaked may have said something specifically referencing Rand, but it's hard for me to tell as it's all in Hebrew. It's important to have English-language references here as this is English Misplaced Pages. -- Doctorx0079 (talk) 15:24, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
Yes, I think Rand's influence on Shaked can be properly sourced. I've added her with The New York Times as the reference. --RL0919 (talk) 03:37, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
The influence that Rand has had on politicians outside the US is certainly of general interest. I have had *personal* conversations with Netanyahu on the matter. It can also be seen in following policy changes over recent decades. I think all references should remain, even if they "spoil" the appearance of a "perfect" article. This will allow editors to butress them with more of the "ironclad" references some seek.These references also appear unchallenged in Hebrew Misplaced Pages. They go much-much beyond so-and-so said x, y and z, and Rand said x, y and z ... Avisalon (talk) 06:40, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
To be clear, my concern is not about "the appearance of a 'perfect' article". Removing poorly sourced claims about living people is an English Misplaced Pages policy. I can't speak to what is on Hebrew Misplaced Pages, but over here it has been pretty common for someone to want to insert a claim about Rand influencing this or that person, with very poor evidence to support that claim. We try to get those resolved quickly, either removing the claim or finding a better source to support it. Leaving poorly sourced content in the hope that someone will improve it someday is not a good option for this type of material. --RL0919 (talk) 16:36, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
I think it'd be appropriate to delete the following passage from this article's biography, on grounds of conjecture and insufficient evidence:
"Although academic interest in her ideas has grown since her death, academic philosophers have generally ignored or rejected her philosophy because of her polemical approach and lack of methodological rigor."
It only cites a single source and may lead readers to believe Rand might not be as credible a philosopher as some of her contemporaries based solely on the opinions of two authors.
This is misleading, as Rand was one of the most influential and well-known philosophers of the twentieth century in the U.S., and her ideas are not widely "ignored" or "rejected" by today's academic philosophers. That said, they're certainly criticized by many socialists, communists, anarchists, and Marxists. This is to be expected, however, as Rand's ideas are antithetical to many of the presuppositions inherent in those schools of thought. Foucault's work, for example, might similarly be "rejected" or "ignored" by some modern academic philosophers—such as Thomas Sowell and Milton Friedman—but these would merely be their opinions.
Moreover, it suggests that Rand's ideas have gained popularity and influence since her death. On the contrary, she was much more influential in the U.S. during her time—having made several appearances on national television and having been the subject of multiple national newspaper articles—and is rarely discussed outside of right-wing libertarian circles today.
I'll leave the article as it appears today to field any objections that others might have. If no well-corroborated objections have been made by 11/9/22 (i.e., one week from today), I'll remove the passage.
The lead section follows the general guidance that article leads should summarize material that is in the main body of the article, where issues are covered in more detail and with more sources. The body text cites multiple sources related to each of the concerns you raise.
The first claim you challenge, that "academic philosophers have generally ignored or rejected her philosophy" is cited in the lead to an encyclopedia article in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy – a recent, peer-reviewed tertiary source that reflects typical academic attitudes. Additional sources cited in the body text include another encyclopedia, a collection of academic essays by critics of Rand,, an academic book about Rand's reception in Eurpoe,, a book by journalist Eric Burns, and others. All these sources make claims of fact about how Rand is typically perceived in academia, and come from eight different authors whose own opinions about her vary.
Moving on to your second major point, the passage you are quoting never "suggests" an increase in "popularity and influence" since she died; it says that "academic interest in her ideas has grown since her death" (emphasis added). The source cited in the lead is the aforementioned collection of critical essays. This is also supported in the body by the citation of an academic book by history professor Jennifer Burns,, an academic book by Mimi Reisel Gladstein, and an encyclopedia article. Other sources have been cited in past iterations of the article, including an academic book by Chris Matthew Sciabarra, and journalism in The Chronicle of Higher Education and Lingua Franca. Beyond explicit sourcing, I note that the number of academic books discussing Rand during her lifetime can be counted on the fingers of one hand. In contrast, the article currently cites more than 20 such books published after her death, most of which are from the last 20 years. Also note that the APA-affiliated Ayn Rand Society and The Journal of Ayn Rand Studies were both founded after her death (facts that are stated and cited in the article).
Finally, whether her "popularity and influence" is greater or lesser now than during her living heyday is harder to discern (and the article makes no claim about that), but your statement that Rand "is rarely discussed outside of right-wing libertarian circles today" is clearly untrue. I will simply note that the list of sources currently in the article incudes books from the last decade by non-libertarians such as Lisa Duggan, Mikhail Kizilov, Cass Sunstein, and Gary Weiss, as well as others who do not have WP articles. If I started citing newspaper and magazine articles, the list could break this Talk page.
Heyl, Jenny A. (1995). "Ayn Rand (1905–1982)". In Waithe, Mary Ellen (ed.). A History of Women Philosophers: Contemporary Women Philosophers, 1900–Today. Vol. 4. Boston: Kluwer Academic. pp. 207–224. ISBN978-0-7923-2807-0.
Cocks, Neil, ed. (2020). Questioning Ayn Rand: Subjectivity, Political Economy, and the Arts. Palgrave Studies in Literature, Culture and Economics (Kindle ed.). Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan. p. 11. ISBN978-3-030-53072-3.
Brühwiler, Claudia Franziska (2021). Out of a Gray Fog: Ayn Rand's Europe (Kindle ed.). Lanham, Maryland: Lexington Books. p. 27. ISBN978-1-79363-686-7.
Cocks, Neil, ed. (2020). Questioning Ayn Rand: Subjectivity, Political Economy, and the Arts. Palgrave Studies in Literature, Culture and Economics (Kindle ed.). Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan. p. 15. ISBN978-3-030-53072-3.