Philosophy, always improving, and quickly Options

[Peter Damian]

http://ocham.blogspot.com/2011/10/crowdsou...philosophy.html

I notice some editor(s) have hamhandedly integrated the history sections with the previous "Geographical" sections of the article. Since the geographical sections were very poorly written (i.e., terribly sourced, tendentiously written, riddled with dubious claims, huge WP:UNDUE problems), this has the net effect of seriously degrading the quality of a half-decent section of the article. Can we revert to the prior organization, or substantially rewrite the entire section to repair these huge problems? To put it simply: if you open almost any reference book on philosophy, or encyclopedia article on philosophy, you will see in the corresponding "history" section a far, far better treatment than the eyesore this article is currently burdened with. And such treatments will be substantially closer to the previous "history of western philosophy" section than the current revision.

[communicat]

http://ocham.blogspot.com/2011/10/crowdsou...philosophy.html

I notice some editor(s) have hamhandedly integrated the history sections with the previous "Geographical" sections of the article. Since the geographical sections were very poorly written (i.e., terribly sourced, tendentiously written, riddled with dubious claims, huge WP:UNDUE problems), this has the net effect of seriously degrading the quality of a half-decent section of the article. Can we revert to the prior organization, or substantially rewrite the entire section to repair these huge problems? To put it simply: if you open almost any reference book on philosophy, or encyclopedia article on philosophy, you will see in the corresponding "history" section a far, far better treatment than the eyesore this article is currently burdened with. And such treatments will be substantially closer to the previous "history of western philosophy" section than the current revision.

I seem to recall having read somewhere that content in the WP category "Philosophy and Thought" occupies just one percent of total content at WP. Why am I not surprised?

This post has been edited by communicat: Sat 8th October 2011, 4:42pm

[Peter Damian]

Today's post http://ocham.blogspot.com/2011/11/philosop...philosophy.html rather upset the hive. Oh well, can't please everybody. I did invite them to use the comment box.

[GlassBeadGame]

Today's post http://ocham.blogspot.com/2011/11/philosop...philosophy.html rather upset the hive. Oh well, can't please everybody. I did invite them to use the comment box.

Don't worry, most probably wont find it.

This philosophy/vanity site did much better even the the link to the Philosophy Action Figures that drew me there no longer works.

[Peter Damian]

Today's post http://ocham.blogspot.com/2011/11/philosop...philosophy.html rather upset the hive. Oh well, can't please everybody. I did invite them to use the comment box.

Don't worry, most probably wont find it.

This philosophy/vanity site did much better even the the link to the Philosophy Action Figures that drew me there no longer works.

It's a specialist blog, read mostly by philosophers. Traffic has crept up recently but mostly undesirable sorts.

I wish you would sort out Wikipedia single handedly yourself GBG. You are so fond of lecturing other people how to do it.

This post has been edited by Peter Damian: Mon 21st November 2011, 8:05pm

[GlassBeadGame]

Today's post http://ocham.blogspot.com/2011/11/philosop...philosophy.html rather upset the hive. Oh well, can't please everybody. I did invite them to use the comment box.

Don't worry, most probably wont find it.

This philosophy/vanity site did much better even the the link to the Philosophy Action Figures that drew me there no longer works.

It's a specialist blog, read mostly by philosophers. Traffic has crept up recently but mostly undesirable sorts.

I wish you would sort out Wikipedia single handedly yourself GBG. You are so fond of lecturing other people how to do it.

You really should think of offering those action figures. Just saying...

[Peter Damian]

You really should think of offering those action figures. Just saying...

Is this some kind of team building exercise?

It was a mistake to come back to this forum. I hate team-building exercises, particularly your sort.

This post has been edited by Peter Damian: Mon 21st November 2011, 8:16pm

[The Joy]

Today's post http://ocham.blogspot.com/2011/11/philosop...philosophy.html rather upset the hive. Oh well, can't please everybody. I did invite them to use the comment box.

Don't worry, most probably wont find it.

This philosophy/vanity site did much better even the the link to the Philosophy Action Figures that drew me there no longer works.

You mean this?

https://files.nyu.edu/iav202/public/powers/powers.html

[GlassBeadGame]

Today's post http://ocham.blogspot.com/2011/11/philosop...philosophy.html rather upset the hive. Oh well, can't please everybody. I did invite them to use the comment box.

Don't worry, most probably wont find it.

This philosophy/vanity site did much better even the the link to the Philosophy Action Figures that drew me there no longer works.

You mean this?

https://files.nyu.edu/iav202/public/powers/powers.html

Yeah but that would compare Peters vanity site with nyu.edu which would not be fair. More to the point it would be so obviously unfair it would suck the irony out of Hey look, The "Merciless" Medievals are kicking Peters butt on Alexis.

This link from the humor page of the comparison vanity site is what I had in mind but it's broke.