User talk:Newbyguesses

  1. Welcome! to User talk:Newbyguesses. If a message is left on this talk page then User:Newbyguesses will usually reply on this talk page, below.
  2. New messages should go at bottom of talk page. Please remember to sign. (~~~~)
  3. Talk page Archives (See Help:Archiving a talk page) Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 |
  4. status: NewbyG contributes via steam-powered computer, with an internet connection provided by messenger pigeons; or occasionally from the library/internet cafe.
  5. Happy editing!
  6. Water off a duck's back.
  7. Sanity check I.
Please add new comments in new sections, e.g., by clicking here. Thanks. Newbyguesses
  1. New Pages Patrol from back.
  2. Take a break from editing if fatigue is a problem, it's very refreshing.
  3. user:Newbyguesses is on ()RR or !1RR, depending upon which page it is which is being edited at the/this time currently. Peace!
  4. A cup of tea for you!

A cup of tea and Welcome! Hope all is well with you.

Hello Newbyguesses! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! —EncMstr 04:32, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Optimism should have a separate page that focuses on the philosophical idea of optimism and distinguishes the philosophical view from "positive thinking" and other everyday uses of the word.
  • Philosophy of social science, has some okay points but requires elaboration on Wittgenstein and Winch, perhaps other linguistic critiques, whether logical positivist or postmodernist.
  • Exchange value needs to be redone, it shouldn't be under 'Marxist theory'- although it's an important component of Marxist theory it's also vital for all economics. That said the article's weight on Marx is also absurd.
  • German Idealism and the articles related to it may need to be rewritten or expanded to avoid undue weight on Arthur Schopenhauer.
  • Protected values first section confuses right action and values and needs a copy edit, moving and wikifying
  • Quality (philosophy) needs a more clear explanation.
  • Socratic dialogues could do with some tidying and clarification. See the talk page for one suggested change.
  • Problem of universals: The introductory definition is (perhaps) fixed. But, the article is poor. Check out the German version.
  • Teleology: the article is shallow and inconsistent.
  • Existentialism: the quality of this article varies wildly and is in desperate need of expert attention.
  • Analytic philosophy This is a very major topic, but still has several sections which are stubs, and several topics which are not covered.
  • Lifeworld A philosophical concept that seems to have fallen exclusively into the hands of the sociologists. Could use some attention; it's a major and complex issue in phenomenology.
  • Perception Needs the attention of philosophically minded Wikipedians. This is only the start of an overhaul of perception and related articles.

Getting started
Getting help
Policies and guidelines

The community

Writing articles
Miscellaneous