Talk:Margaret Sanger

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Margaret Sanger article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8: 14 days

Margaret Sanger is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.

This article will appear on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on May 18, 2025.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
October 17, 2011	Good article nominee	Listed
August 21, 2015	Good article reassessment	Delisted
January 29, 2025	Good article nominee	Listed
February 23, 2025	Peer review	Reviewed
March 21, 2025	Featured article candidate	Promoted
Current status: Featured article

Biography: Politics and Government / Core

	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 politics and government work group (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is listed on the project's core biographies page.

Socialism Mid‑importance

	Socialism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism 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.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sexology and sexuality Mid‑importance

	Human sexuality portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality 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.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women's History High‑importance

	History portal 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 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.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Feminism High‑importance

	Feminism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Feminism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Feminism 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.FeminismWikipedia:WikiProject FeminismTemplate:WikiProject FeminismFeminism
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Nursing High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Nursing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Nursing 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.NursingWikipedia:WikiProject NursingTemplate:WikiProject NursingNursing
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

New York (state) Low‑importance

	New York (state) portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York (state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of New York 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.New York (state)Wikipedia:WikiProject New York (state)Template:WikiProject New York (state)New York (state)
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to abortion, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Featured Article

So, this article got certified as a Featured Article on 21 March 2025. The specific version that got approved is identified at the top of this Talk page in the Milestones section ( https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Margaret_Sanger&oldid=1281650573 ). Noleander (talk) 01:49, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lead image

I can't help but feel there must be a better lead image: The Library of Congress has a ton of options; could we choose one of those? Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.9% of all FPs.} 10:54, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Adam Cuerden Thanks for suggesting ways to improve the article. I agree that a photo displaying only MS is best, but I am not able to find a decent photo that has evidence of "free use" status. The article used the following headshot photo for many years: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MargaretSanger-Underwood.LOC.jpg But during the recent Featured Article review, we discovered that the headshot pic does not have evidence that it was published before 1930 (it is not sufficient that it was _taken_ before 1930). So the headshot pic was removed from the article and replaced with the current photo (with the sons) which I think most people would agree is not as suitable.

If you, or anyone, can find a nice headshot such as https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MargaretSanger-Underwood.LOC.jpg was has evidence IT WAS PUBLISHED (e.g. in a newspaper) before 1930, that would be great!! [Note that simply because the pic is in a museum collection, or Library of Congress, that is not evidence that the picture was published before 1930]. I can help to update the pic tags in Wiki Commons, and get the pic into this article. Noleander (talk) 14:26, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, a helpful editor changed the InfoBox pic a couple of days ago to use the nice headshot that is, unfortunately, not free use, so I reverted that. I left them a polite msg on their talk page explaining why the nice headshot cannot be used ... see User_talk:Lukepowerll#Margaret_Sanger_pic. Noleander (talk) 14:39, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Lukepowerll: You have inserted a copyright-violating image into the article twice.

Library of Congress photo indexes are not proof of publication. Lots of image archives have inaccurate or misleading info about their photographs.

The image expert at FA recently reviewed the headshot image and concluded that there was NO PROOF of publication. I really liked that image, so at that time I searched high and low for proof, but could not find it.

Best would be if you could find a newspaper or something that included the photo (before 1930). I already did that search, but maybe you'll have better luck. Or, you can contact the FA image expert user Nikkimaria and ask their opinion. if they agree that the LOC index data is proof of publication, then that is sufficient.

The reason this is a big deal is that the article will lose its FA status if a non-free image is inserted into the article.

Please discuss here on the article talk page before inserting the image again. Noleander (talk) 17:06, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

https://digital.library.ucla.edu/catalog/ark:/21198/zz002h9k8p is part of the Los Angeles Times collection, which is licensed under Creative Commons. The University was granted the archive. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.9% of all FPs.} 00:16, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Similarly https://digital.library.ucla.edu/catalog/ark:/21198/zz002j7fwk Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.9% of all FPs.} 00:27, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The 1936 pic (zz002j7fwk) is not bad ... she is smiling, and clothing is a bit iconoclastic. The 1928 pic (zz002h9k8p) is not very compelling, she looks tired & depressed. They are both higher resolution than the current InfoBox pic with sons, so that is a plus. I have no objection to the 1936 pic (zz002j7fwk) ... but it should be cropped so the head & shoulders fill most of the frame. I can do that if no one else wants to. Or we can wait & see what user Lukepowerll says ... maybe they will find publication proof of the contentious headshot. Noleander (talk) 00:34, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, https://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/2014700792/ is part of the George Bantham Bain collection, which is simple {{PD-Bain}} Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.9% of all FPs.} 00:37, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Bain picture is awfully bland ... another pensive shot, not looking at the camera. So far, I'm liking the 1936 pic (zz002j7fwk). Thanks for taking the time to find these photos!! Noleander (talk) 00:47, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Margaret Sanger talks about birth control, Los Angeles, 1936 - Original.jpg - It can be cropped, of course, but it's important to have an unaltered original uploaded. I can restore it. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.9% of all FPs.} 11:18, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to crop and enhance it, I would have no objection to putting a cropped version in the infoBox. Ideally - maybe someday in the future - we'll find a free use pic that shows her at the height of her activism, circa 1914 to 1925. Noleander (talk) 13:12, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Since it's replacable, I maybe didn't give it the level of intense care I do for WP:FPs, but I think it'll do nicely for now. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.9% of all FPs.} 19:29, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, it looks fantastic! Thanks so much for doing that. Who knows, it may end up in that InfoBox for many years to come. Noleander (talk) 19:38, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will be on WP main page 18 May 2025

The folks at WP:TFA have approved this article to appears as "Today's Featured Article" on the main page of WP one month from now, on 18 May 2025.

If anyone spots any vandalism, or any edits that fall short of the Featured Article criteria, it would be appreciated if they resolved the issue; or if you don't have time or resources, ping me and I'll make time to work on it (I have copies of all the biographies). Criteria for FA are at WP:Featured article criteria.

I think this article has some rudimentary Pending Change protection, which offers limited protection against vandalism from IPs, so that should help. Noleander (talk) 00:45, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Noleander: Congratulations! What an immense amount of nice work! North8000 (talk) 01:01, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. She is was a great person, and deserves a great article! Noleander (talk) 01:07, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes review

Just a reminder that a pending changes acceptance (I just did one here) merely means "not vandalism" and is not an endorsement of the edit. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 18:17, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Religion of Margaret Sanger

Regarding recent edit by IP: "Sanger called herself an Episcopalian in an interview with Mike Wallace." That is a true statement. But it is a primary source, better would be a secondary source. None of her major biographers mentions her belonging to any specific religion: My impression from reading all the biographies is that she was rather non-theistic. A secondary source that is fairly reliable is the M. Sanger Papers project, which has this to say:

As for the claim that Sanger was an atheist, one who denies the existence of god, it too is untrue. Sanger herself identified as Episcopalian in a 1957 interview with Mike Wallace. She was raised Catholic, married a Jewish man, and eventually joined her second husband, J. Noah Slee, in the Episcopalian Church. She had both of her sons baptized in the Episcopalian faith, a choice that was obviously her own because their father, William Sanger, was Jewish and, thus, would not have advocated for baptism. While it is true that told her son, Grant, that she had “outgrown the need of Church” in a letter written in 1928, she also said in the same letter that she has “no objection to [Grant] joining the church & being confirmed.

Source for the above is: Jill Grimaldi "Margaret Sanger: Closeted Atheist Marxist? Probably Not" 10 Dec 2010 https://sangerpapers.wordpress.com/tag/atheist/

I'll see if I can condense that somehow, and replace the newly added "Episcopalian" sentence, and find a better section for it. Noleander (talk) 19:33, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. Emphasizing what I wrote in the previous section, accepting under pending changes (which I did) merely means "not vandalism" and is not an endorsement of the edit. North8000 (talk) 20:36, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, I saw your comment above. You did the right thing. Noleander (talk) 21:57, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I found a mention of religion in Chesler p 245 "She [Sanger] was an atheist" ... this in the chapter on her 1922 marriage to her 2nd husband. Chesler and others hint that Sanger more-or-less adopted Episcopal church, to a small degree, after the 2nd marriage. And even then it was in a spiritual sense, not a dogmatic/religious sense. Noleander (talk) 22:28, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I completed editing the religion info. If anyone sees any issues, let me know. Noleander (talk) 00:44, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]