John Locke was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. 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.
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights 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.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of Oxford, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the University of Oxford 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.University of OxfordWikipedia:WikiProject University of OxfordTemplate:WikiProject University of OxfordUniversity of Oxford articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Somerset, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Somerset 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.SomersetWikipedia:WikiProject SomersetTemplate:WikiProject SomersetSomerset articles
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 articles
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 articles
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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism 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.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism articles
In the text there is mention of Locke as a bachelor. Perhaps this can be developed. Locke's biographer, Roger Woolhouse suggests that Locke's relationship with Toinard was suggestive of homosexuality. These elements have been picked up by Brian Smith in "Assessing ‘unnatural lusts’: John Locke on the permissibility of male-male intimacy" History of European Ideas (2022); see also Roger Woolhouse, Locke: A Biography (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007), 149. Bs.smth78 (talk) 06:41, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know about this, but maybe there is more to it than just coincidence or political affiliation that Locke returned to Britain as an advisor to Dutch prince William III of Orange, the future British King consort, who was known in those days to be a homosexual. Hansung02 (talk) 13:26, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Locke compared the English monarchy's rule over the British people to Adam's rule over Eve in Genesis, which was appointed by God." This sentence, with a citation to Two Treatises on Government, states the opposite of what Locke was arguing in that book. He is refuting an author who believed in absolute monarchy based on the idea that fatherhood was the basis of absolute rule and that Adam was the first father and thus the first monarch. Locke masterfully refutes this logic page after page in the book cited leading him to oppose even the idea that Adam was monarch over Eve, which is the opposite of what is stated in this article. I suggest this sentence be removed. 2601:249:447F:1960:4C7E:C02C:C6F2:C21A (talk) 15:11, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As this article points out very little, there is progressive liberalism and classical liberalism. From the point of thoughts, those are pretty distinct streams. The modern progressive liberalism is quite different from the one that Locke advocated for and which we call classical liberalism.
I propose this to be clearly stated and better distinguished otherwise people tend to mix it. MitoSK (talk) 14:46, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Since Locke's dates of birth and death (29 August 1632 and 28 October 1704 respectively) are established to be in the Julian calendar, would it be appropriate to add the equivalent New Style dates in the Gregorian calendar (8 September 1632 and 8 November 1704 respectively)? TheAmazingCoffeeMan (talk) 07:26, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
While the article, as it stands, acknowledges some influence from Spinoza (via the argument of Rebecca Newberger Goldstein), it remains quite vague. Wim Klever, in his 2012 article "Locke’s Disguised Spinozism", reconstructs Locke’s immense indebtedness to Spinoza in "the fields of theology, physics, epistemology, ethics, and politics" and arrives at the – convincing but perhaps overstated – conclusion that "Locke’s philosophy … is, in all its foundational concepts and its headlines, a kind of reproduction of Spinoza’s work." I believe it ought to be mentioned in the article that this is at least a tenable position and that an understanding of Spinoza is crucial for the understanding of Locke.
"Perhaps overstated" is correct. Academics present fascinating novel arguments about well established subjects all the time, and it is not the role of an encyclopedia article to collate them all unless they become influential in the literature. Remsense ‥ 论14:27, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you say that the article isn't influential enough to be included, I am fine with it (although I don’t know what the criterion for that would be). In my opinion, a relationship of some sort between the two is undeniable when one has read the evidence that Klever compiles, yet my opinion can hardly be enough. Joxorium (talk) 15:08, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We're a tertiary source, and we ideally synthesize what is said across secondary sources. To illustrate, it would indicate that Klever's position would be due for inclusion and citation here if his article has seen significant citation in later works, especially in tertiary sources, edited volumes or monographs. Generally, whether others working in the field have been vocally inspired by his ideas, perhaps even in their disagreeing with them Remsense ‥ 论16:07, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
level-3 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Not done: 'Instil' is correct in British English, which the article uses throughout. Tollens (talk) 09:02, 12 December 2023 (UTC)