Talk:Noam Chomsky#Semi-protected edit request on 22 August 2014

{{Pin message|}}{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|1997070370}}

Some remaining tasks to take this article to featured status, with some imported from the recent peer review:

• {{Template:Checkbox (colored)|unchecked|color=green}} Review all citations for text–source integrity
• {{Template:Checkbox (colored)|unchecked|color=green}} Replace primary sources with best-in-class sources
• {{Template:Checkbox (colored)|unchecked|color=green}} Replace chomsky.info sources
• {{Template:Checkbox (colored)|unchecked|color=green}} Bundle citations with {{tlx|sfnm}} where feasible
• {{Template:Checkbox (colored)|unchecked|color=green}} Rewrite the parts that rely on "Brain from Top to Bottom"
• {{Template:Checkbox (colored)|unchecked|color=green}} Rewrite the beginning of {{alink||Universal grammar}} and add a paragraph break
• {{Template:Checkbox (colored)|unchecked|color=green}} Define "rationalism" as parallel to definition of "empiricism"
• {{Template:Checkbox (colored)|unchecked|color=green}} Get a better source for Saudi Arabia political views; try McGilvray
• {{Template:Checkbox (colored)|unchecked|color=green}} Get a better source for views on partition of Palestine
• {{Template:Checkbox (colored)|unchecked|color=green}} Reduce hagiography in {{alink||In politics}}: remove quotes, pare second paragraph, expand on Srebrenica massacre remarks, consider page number for Rabbani 2012, consider paring re: Horowitz, Kay, ADL, Dershowitz
• {{Template:Checkbox (colored)|unchecked|color=green}} Address history of controversial statements on genocide in the political beliefs section {{doi|10.5038/1911-9933.14.1.1738}}
• {{Template:Checkbox (colored)|unchecked|color=green}} Turn the achievements laundry list into readable prose
• {{Template:Checkbox (colored)|unchecked|color=green}} Confirm with sourced prose or remove the flatlist items from the infobox
• {{Template:Checkbox (colored)|unchecked|color=green}} Add commas after "in year X" clauses
• {{Template:Checkbox (colored)|unchecked|color=green}} Consider whether to expand on his views on the Russian invasion of Ukraine
• {{Template:Checkbox (colored)|unchecked|color=green}} Incorporate noteworthy anti-Chomsky critique into the Political views section so the final section can focus on Influence/Legacy
• {{Template:Checkbox (colored)|unchecked|color=green}} Cross-reference {{IEP|chomsky-philosophy|Noam Chomsky}}
• {{Template:Checkbox (colored)|unchecked|color=green}} Invite reviewers to the FA nom

czar 04:21, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

A number of contemporary liguistics ( Pullum, Harris, Postal,Levine, Sampson,Everett) have spoken out against Chomsky for dogmatism and missconduct. Harris covers this in his book, the Linguistic wars, in which he documents extensive evidence for a personal campaign against his students opposing deep grammar ( see Linguistics wars) by neglecting their reserach and actively trying to bar the from prominent academic discourse. I think this should not be neglected, particularly in the context of Dan Dan veretts research into Piraha Langauge and culture which led to a campaign that temporarily banned him from visiting the piraha and and which resulted in Chomsky calling him a Charlatan ( see talk given by Pullum at MIT and Geoff Pullum. 24.134.36.65 (talk) 21:47, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

:Innuendo has no place here. You're offering your personal interpretations of events and writings, which are never relevant to Wikipedia. [This is certainly correct.] As you note, there is already an article about the subject ... if you have NPOV additions or corrections supported by reliable sources, you can make them there. It's important to be aware that the dispute you are referring to is an academic one (see, e.g., https://inference-review.com/letter/a-dozen-years-of-misunderstanding), and so reference to it should be made at Linguistic wars, not cast as personal attacks on Chomsky on his page. (And the POV personal attacks on Chomsky at Geoff Pullum are bad enough ... they certainly shouldn't be dragged into this article.) BTW, I see that most of the contributions by your IP address have been vandalism. Please don't follow that path. 2600:8802:5913:1700:F975:9572:32C0:993F (talk) 09:32, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

::I don't agree with the OP, but your characterization of what can ever be included in articles is incorrect. Remsense ‥ 论 09:56, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

Alternative Bookstores

After the lead is over, Noam Chomsky's contemporary and early-modern influences and effects were made known. It then says he developed an "early" interest in anarchism, highlighting his time period from acquiring them from alternative book stores. There is no citation at the end of that premise or statement so I ask, is the article referring to "independent" book stores or is the proper terminology "alternative?" What are alternative book stores and how does relate to his early interest in anarchism? WikiStarpluck (talk) 19:22, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

:The article body is more specific, describing the bookstores as left-wing and anarchist. I think whoever wrote "alternative bookstores" meant alternative as "relating to behavior that is considered unconventional and is often seen as a challenge to traditional norms" (from Google). Yue🌙 20:14, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

The infobox seems to think so, as it describes it under the academic section. I know very little about the structure of US academia, but this strikes me as somewhat implausible. Has Chomsky ever published anything peer-reviewed regarding politics? 94.44.239.68 (talk) 12:38, 25 April 2025 (UTC)