Talk:Phenomenological Sociology
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Philosophy, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details. | ||||||||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. | ||||||||
| ??? | This article has not yet received an importance rating on the importance scale. | ||||||||
|
|||||||||
[edit] Section headings
Hi, I edited the page to better reflect the manual of style of Wikipedia (MOS). In this case the capitalisation of the section headings. I also used the section Introduction as the lead section. The latter is a case of interpetation, and the using the indtroduction as a lead section is not always a good idea. In this case, I do believe you are right, and it isn't the best choise. The capitalisation of the section headers however is clearer in the MOS. It roughly says not to use capitals, execpt for proper nouns, and the start of a new sentense. If you have a good motivation not to follow the MOS here, that's fine, but could you indicate those reasons? Martijn Hoekstra 21:40, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
I did not notice the changes and changed them back because they were not consistent and I could not figure out what was going on. Feel free to return them to your format. I am not concerned with the format issues particularly until I get the text worked out. I have noticed however that I can't modify the bibliography and I have things to add. I am also new to the system. ```` —Preceding unsigned comment added by ASchutz (talk • contribs) 03:07, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I saw you have been busy with the references. I shall explain how they work on your talk page, but if you just want to lump in some info, that's fine with me too, I'll convert them. (just add them in below {{referencelist}}) Martijn Hoekstra 10:28, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
- Can you still find some more info on the references for me. Just a year and a writer is too little for me to find them back. If you can add a COI, ISBN or title of the work, any will do, I can find the rest, and make them into the format I used earlier. Martijn Hoekstra 14:53, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Readability
I just tagged this article as jargon, but it has numerous problems. These seem to stem from the fact that the article has been chiefly authored by one editor, and one not familiar with WP style. Aside from numerous errors in spelling and formatting, I would say that this article is all but inaccessible to someone outside the field, and from what I can gather, proposes points which are easily debatable among those knowledgeable about phenomenological sociology. Is there anyone who can improve this without starting from scratch? Also, I remind you, User:ASchutz, that you cannot simply claim an article as yours and "finish" it at some point. Ipsenaut (talk) 12:40, 9 April 2008 (UTC) ______________________________________________________________
There was no article on this subject before I provided the initial draft. I began it because someone has to get the ball rolling on this subject. The reference to "finish" is a direct reference to the completion of my start for the article - a reference cited by you out of context. I am now disinclined to "finish" this initial draft of the article. You will also note that I am only "framing" the topic. I assume that there are multiple phenomenological sociologies.
If you have tagged the article because you feel that points are easily debatable, you have an obligation to note the debatable points. "Jargon" is a loose accusation when you don't specify what it is that you are talking about. By all means, please bring on the "experts". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.185.150.45 (talk) 14:45, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
