Talk:Integral theory

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Integral theory article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

[edit] References

While the text is not bad, it needs inline references. Also, Mr. Wilber's work needs to be referenced from third party sources as much as possible. Wikipedia is after "verifiability, not truth". --Rocksanddirt 04:45, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Explanation?

There is no explanation of what this allegedly amazing theory is. This whole article just pontificates on how wonderful it is, whatever it is. This is a pointless article.72.78.180.31 02:36, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Not so much pointless - Wilber's theories are certainly notable - as somewhat unbalanced. Those interested in this subject may find this link of interest. Wikipedia:Fringe theories/Noticeboard#Intergral theory, etc.. Ben MacDui (Talk) —Preceding comment was added at 08:47, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

How is this different from "Integral thought"? DGG (talk) 05:22, 15 November 2007 (UTC)