Talk:Metaphysics: Difference between revisions
GA nomination |
MisterCake (talk | contribs) No edit summary Tag: Reverted |
||
Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
:As a general remark I think the article is looking better than a lot of our philosophy articles. I am wondering if something should be added to the lede concerning the problems/criticisms in modern science, and even modern philosophy, which are discussed in the article.--[[User:Andrew Lancaster|Andrew Lancaster]] ([[User talk:Andrew Lancaster|talk]]) 08:33, 6 April 2024 (UTC) |
:As a general remark I think the article is looking better than a lot of our philosophy articles. I am wondering if something should be added to the lede concerning the problems/criticisms in modern science, and even modern philosophy, which are discussed in the article.--[[User:Andrew Lancaster|Andrew Lancaster]] ([[User talk:Andrew Lancaster|talk]]) 08:33, 6 April 2024 (UTC) |
||
::{{ping|Andrew Lancaster}} Thanks for the feedback. I agree that the lead needs some work since it currently does not summarize several parts of the article. I usually try to fix the body of the article first before moving on to the lead. This might be another week or two before I get to it but hopefully not too long. I'll make sure to include something about the criticisms as well. [[User:Phlsph7|Phlsph7]] ([[User talk:Phlsph7|talk]]) 10:37, 6 April 2024 (UTC) |
::{{ping|Andrew Lancaster}} Thanks for the feedback. I agree that the lead needs some work since it currently does not summarize several parts of the article. I usually try to fix the body of the article first before moving on to the lead. This might be another week or two before I get to it but hopefully not too long. I'll make sure to include something about the criticisms as well. [[User:Phlsph7|Phlsph7]] ([[User talk:Phlsph7|talk]]) 10:37, 6 April 2024 (UTC) |
||
==Kripke?== |
|||
Not sure how to weave him into the well-written last bit, but he deserves a mention. [[User:MisterCake|<span style="color: #000000;">'''Cake'''</span>]] ([[User talk:MisterCake#top|talk]]) 02:01, 24 April 2024 (UTC) |
Revision as of 02:01, 24 April 2024
Metaphysics is currently a Philosophy and religion good article nominee. Nominated by Phlsph7 (talk) at 17:20, 11 April 2024 (UTC) An editor has indicated a willingness to review the article in accordance with the good article criteria. Further reviews are welcome from any editor who has not contributed significantly to this article (or nominated it), and can be added to the review page, but the decision whether or not to list the article as a good article should be left to the first reviewer. Short description: Study of fundamental reality |
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Metaphysics article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 365 days |
Daily page views
|
This level-3 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The contents of the Metametaphysics page were merged into Metaphysics on 6 February 2015. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
Changes to the article
I was thinking about implementing changes to this article with the hope of moving it in the direction of GA status. There is still a lot to do since many passages and several full subsections lack sources and the article has various maintenance tags (1x More citations needed section, 2x Unreferenced section, 4x citation needed, 2x page needed). The section "Epistemological foundation" has a WP:NPOV problem since there are many metaphysical methodologies and the deductive approach is not the only one. It could also be expanded to cover the methodology of metaphysics more generally rather than just focusing on epistemological foundations.
The section "History" is very long and encompasses a total of 17 subsections. Since we don't have an article "History of metaphysics", this section could be split off into its own article and replaced with a concise summary of the most important points with a main-template pointing to the main article, see WP:SUMMARYSTYLE. The discussion of the main topics in metaphysics is split into two sections: "Central questions" and "Peripheral questions". As far as I'm aware, this division is not found in the reliable sources and it might be better to have a common section by rearranging the topics. An important omission from this selection of topics is the problem of universals (and possibly also mereology). I was also thinking about having a short explanation somewhere of how metaphysics has been divided into branches, such as the old contrast between general metaphysics and special/specific metaphysics, and things like applied metaphysics and metametaphysics. This discussion should probably be brief to avoid having too much overlap with the section(s) discussing the topics. Some of these branches are already discussed individually so they could be rearranged to a common place.
Various smaller adjustments would be needed but they can be addressed later since the ones mentioned so far would already involve a lot of work to implement. I was hoping to get some feedback on these ideas and possibly other suggestions. I still have to do some research to work out the details. After that, I would start implementing them one at a time but it will probably take a while to address all the points. Phlsph7 (talk) 10:01, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- As a general remark I think the article is looking better than a lot of our philosophy articles. I am wondering if something should be added to the lede concerning the problems/criticisms in modern science, and even modern philosophy, which are discussed in the article.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 08:33, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Andrew Lancaster: Thanks for the feedback. I agree that the lead needs some work since it currently does not summarize several parts of the article. I usually try to fix the body of the article first before moving on to the lead. This might be another week or two before I get to it but hopefully not too long. I'll make sure to include something about the criticisms as well. Phlsph7 (talk) 10:37, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
Kripke?
Not sure how to weave him into the well-written last bit, but he deserves a mention. Cake (talk) 02:01, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- Good article nominees
- Good article nominees on review
- C-Class vital articles
- Wikipedia level-3 vital articles
- Wikipedia vital articles in Philosophy and religion
- C-Class level-3 vital articles
- Wikipedia level-3 vital articles in Philosophy and religion
- C-Class vital articles in Philosophy and religion
- C-Class Philosophy articles
- Top-importance Philosophy articles
- C-Class metaphysics articles
- Top-importance metaphysics articles
- Metaphysics task force articles