Talk:Typoglycemia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Keep this

Someone is bound to try and speedy this. For about 2 seconds, I wuz going to do it myself; but this is one of those rare cases where not only the article of seeming gibberish, but even the very peculiar format, should be kept, I think: so this is my preëmptive objection against any speedy delete or Vfd. The mdiuem is the massgee, in sum. Bill 9 July 2005 19:06 (UTC)

Color me conservative, but I think the bulk of the article should use standard English orthography. The text as it stands is one of those ubiquitous emails that gets forwarded around. FreplySpang (talk) 9 July 2005 19:13 (UTC)

There, I added an intro. FreplySpang (talk) 9 July 2005 19:20 (UTC)

Chicken....! Well I suppose we have to be serious, but between NPOV and seriousness, Wickedpedia really is kinda flat sometimes.... (On the other hand I'm delighted my filters are working efficiently: I've never got the e‑mail!) — Best, Bill 19:37, 9 July 2005 (UTC)

Thanks both of you for your quick response and co-operation. Since I'm Afrikaans speaking, and my spelling is very bad :-) I was unable to produce a proper introduction, so thanks FreplySpang for improving my article, and Bill, I'm on my way to visit your website! JohanL 20:00, 9 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] THIS IS TRUE!

This stuff is not an urban legend. It's true, atleast to me.

I can read the text fine. Don't know how i do it, though.

It is definately not true. It can be done the 'random' scrambling is done to assist your interpretation. For example, if I took 'calendar', and spelt it 'claendar', you probably get it right. If I instead write 'cdaenalr', not so easy. Or howabout the following sentances:

"It has lnog been an aoixm of mnie taht the ltlite tgnihs are itileifnny the msot irapnomtt."

"He akeatctd eyinhetrvg in lfie wtih a mix of eoitdrararxny guiens and nviae iteepncocmne, and it was oetfn dcilifuft to tlel wcihh was wchih." --Recurring 14:55, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Useful entry -- VOTE TO KEEP

The editorial note questions the "validity" of the article owing to the Wiki "notability guideline" -- and/or the "validity" of the purported "condition" of typoglycemia. It is precisely because of the latter -- the questionablilty of the condition -- that the article deserves to STAY.

In other words: the name "typoglycemia" is obviously a light-hearted pun (play on the word "hypoglycemia"), and yet the phenominon of being able to comprehend the scrambled words is apparent. The articles deserves to STAY in order to establish just that: it is not a board-certified conditional broadly acknowledged by the medical community... just a fun word for an easily demonstrable phenominon.

I can well envision someone seeing the term in print (or email or web-page), and turning to Wikipedia to look it up. It deserves an entry to establish the origin and nature of the term. -- Harasty 12:56, 30 March 2007 (UTC)