Talk:Alfred North Whitehead

	; Archives (Index) ;
	1; 2;
	This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Alfred North Whitehead was one of the Philosophy and religion good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
November 24, 2013	Good article nominee	Listed
January 4, 2014	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
July 15, 2017	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
January 10, 2025	Good article reassessment	Delisted
Current status: Delisted good article

Biography: Science and Academia

	Biography portal 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
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group (assessed as High-importance).

England

	England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England 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.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Philosophy: Philosophers / Metaphysics / Logic / Religion / Analytic / Contemporary High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. 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 Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Philosophers
	Metaphysics
	Logic
	Philosophy of religion
	Analytic philosophy
	Contemporary philosophy

Christianity Mid‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity 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.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Religion Top‑importance

	Religion portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Mathematics High‑priority

	Mathematics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mathematics 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.MathematicsWikipedia:WikiProject MathematicsTemplate:WikiProject Mathematicsmathematics
High	This article has been rated as High-priority on the project's priority scale.

GA concerns

I am concerned that this article no longer meets the good article criteria. Some of my concerns are listed below:

The article has lots of uncited statements, including entire paragraphs.
The article has an overreliance on block quotes, negatively affecting the prose of the article.

Is anyone willing to address the above concerns, or should this go to WP:GAR? Z1720 (talk) 03:49, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment

Alfred North Whitehead

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: Delisted. Hog Farm _Talk 02:04, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article has numerous uncited statements, including entire paragraphs. There is also an overreliance on block quotes, negatively affecting the prose and preventing the article from being concise. Z1720 (talk) 23:07, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delist unless anyone offers to improve the article soon. Apart from the points in the nomination, there appear to be personal commentaries such as "It may not be inappropriate to speculate that some fair portion of the respect generally shown to Whitehead by his philosophical peers at the time arose from their sheer bafflement." and "Here it is worthwhile to quote Whitehead at length". Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 18:37, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delist in line with both recommendations above. The content is also not apparently well-balanced/DUE: for instance in "Political views" the first sentence appears to me to be original research (the anachronistic attribution of Libertarianism) and then the section makes no mention of Harvard's Pareto Circle, which has been the most-often-mentioned political activity in the secondary sources on Whitehead's politics that I'm familiar with. RowanElder (talk) 18:51, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.