Talk:John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 |
Untitled
I just edited in the part about Family Guy, but is there some non-clunky way to acknowledge that there isn't actually a test, or should the mention of that a couple of paragraphs above be adequate notice? Stilgar135 01:16, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Does the reference from Family Guy really need to even be in there? Is it really at all relevant? - Lifefeed 12:48, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)
- It doesn't take anything away from the article. It shows that the MacArthur grant is recognized, to some extent, in pop culture, even if they don't get their facts straight (or intentionally get them wrong to make the plot go). Still, it probably doesn't belong at the beginning of the article- a "miscellany" or "trivia" section might be a better idea. Stilgar135 14:07, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- That works for me. - Lifefeed 13:12, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)
- "recently featured"? recent to when?
Population Control?
I didn't see any use of the word "control" in the link which supposedly backs up that "Topics of Interest" list. I'd say they seem interested in "population." Mantator (talk) 22:51, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
Peter Hayes (2000)
The Peter Hayes who won the MacArthur in 2000 isn't the English sculptor. The Peter Hayes who won it was awarded the grant for his work in Nuclear Non-Proliferation as well as his work with North Korea. I don't know how to modify the link so it doesn't point to the Sculptor, but I thought I should chime in.
"Stephen Lee"
The snooker player got a MacArthur? --Muchosucko 06:06, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
Bankers Life & Casualty Company
MacArthur did not found it as was previously suggested. Rather, he bought it for a small amount in the early 1920's, and grew it into a much larger company than it previously had been.
How to add criticism
I axed supposition about whether the foundation is true to what John D. MacArthur would have wanted; this does not belong in an objective history summary. Complaints should be summarized in a separate criticism section: "The foundation has drawn complaints from commentators such as John Q. Conservative, head of The Conservative Group, who states that..." or "Former MacArthur board member John Q. Conservative believes the foundation has strayed from its roots," etc.3Tigers 18:21, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
Support to eugenics on past
The article forgets the support of this foundation to eugenics on past and to ecology and abortion today.Agre22 (talk) 04:08, 27 May 2009 (UTC)agre22