User:UnsoundResonance

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is a Wikipedia user page.

This is not an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user to whom this page belongs may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia itself. The original page is located at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:UnsoundResonance.

[edit] About Me

UnsoundResonance has been a wikipedian as of 20:43, March 1, 2006 (UTC). The current date and time is 15 June 2008 T 11:56 UTC. He has a B.A. in English and a B.A. in Philosophy, and is currently working on attaining an M.A. in English.

But call me Joe.

My areas of focus will likely pertain to English or Philosophy, or any of the plentitude of subcategories within them. I consider myself an avid fan of Wikipedia, and have been for some time, but I am still rather new to the process of editing Wikipedia entries.

After some time of altering pages, I think it is time to say that I am a fan of the "task" links to be found below, particularly the "wikify" section. I find a lot of work through those links.

This is a helpful page: Tutorial


Here are some tasks you can do:

WikiProject Philosophy task list

  • German Idealism and almost all the articles related to it need to be either rewritten or expanded, because a wikipedia user called Lestrade has, among other things, taken it upon himself to imbue each page with bias in favour of Schopenhauer, who he attempts to present as having the last say in everything. This is a terrible thing to do, because German Idealism is such an important period in philosophy, whose influence is still strongly felt today.
  • Protected Values first section confuses right action and values and needs a copy edit, moving and wikifying
  • Ludwig Wittgenstein is having its FA status reviewed due to a couple of concerns. Help save Ludwig! See Wikipedia:Featured article review/Ludwig Wittgenstein for requirements for retaining FA status.
  • 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.
  • Star of Sophia Vote for or nominate someone you think is deserving!
  • Analytic_philosophy This is a very major topic, but still has several sections which are stubs, and several topics which are not covered.
  • Inverse (logic) This article makes me wish that there were a fail grade on the quality scale. Someone should rewrite it.

Vote | Larry's Text | stubs | edit this list | discuss these tasks | Category:Philosophy | Portal:Philosophy | RFC | Deletion | Requested articles | Noticeboard | Discussion