4355:. One section of the article is headed āNames, words, language and meaningā ā a bit ambitious for what must be a relatively short and unpretentious paragraph. The intention is to show how nomenclature, as the arena of names/nouns within language as a daily activity, connects to both linguistics and the philosophy of language. I need a simple statement that covers current thinking concerning the way words as names/nouns combined with the rules that govern their use impact on the way we structure or perceive the world. There ... real easy for you chaps and lasses. I'm not looking for "solutions" - more state of play. Perhaps it is best if you just read the article and see what you think needs fitting into the slot that seems to need filling (please) Thank you. I would be very grateful if you could suggest an appropriate para on the talk page of the article. Nothing too complex. I'm not asking much am I?
847:
get things organized. I think the important thing to note here, is that there are a few people in CFD and there is an even smaller number here. If we want to make any progress on categories we have to conduct a great political movement for over a month? There are several other entries on this page after this topic. It's reasonable to believe that silence is consent. Now we will need to go through the process of organizing the support we need ahead of time in order to do this simple thing that is proposed. It should have been speedy deleted, and this production is mindless bureaucracy. I don't mind bureaucracies or oligarchies so much at all -- just mindless ones.
3767:
articles, magazines, web sites, and organizations applying the term to themselves is consistent with definition 1 instead. The tendentious editor has proposed moving the article and was voted down, so now he deletes his 3-revert warnings from his own talk page and attempts to create a consensus on other users' talk pages where his viewpoint will encounter no resistance, rather than on the article's own talk page. In general he seems to bring editors into the article who are abusive, argue by putting words into others' mouths, and recite their opinions over and over without providing evidence of verifiability.
4094:
working to do so within the normal rules of wikipedia. I know that some of my own frustration (and I assume his) is because I do see what Peter and I are trying to do as being a good faith attempt to get the article up to something worthwhile including references and so on, but then seeing the article quickly tagged and so on distracts from (and slows) that project. Peter has a wealth of knowledge on the topic, and is probably one of the best qualified people in the project to work on this article. Unfortunately, the philosophy project lost one of its best (and most contentious) editors when
3703:"hylomorphism" applied to Aristotle's theories, not to Plato's.) In addition, I feel that combining Platonic and Aristotelian hylomorphism into a single article makes things unnecessarily confusing. (Many of the remarks about "hylomorphism" in the current article apply only to Aristotelian hylomorphism, thereby compounding the confusion.) Anyhow, I'd appreciate any feedback on my draft. (Please note that I am not suggesting that we discuss only Aristotelian hylomorphism in an article titled Hylomorphism. Rather, I am suggesting that we revise this article in accordance with my draft and
3796:: "Neutrality requires that the article should fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by a reliable source, and should do so in proportion to the prominence of each. Now an important qualification: In general, articles should not give minority views as much or as detailed a description as more popular views, and will generally not include tiny-minority views at all. For example, the article on the Earth does not mention modern support for the Flat Earth concept, a view of a distinct minority."
3023:
articles have "fallen through the cracks." I have found articles which are inconsistent with the rest (objectivism or objectivity? and many many others). Using this method we are very often able to differentiate between the "theory" and the "concepts" which usually play the role of a theorem of a particular theory, Using this method, eventually I hope we will be able to organize while differentiating between concepts and theories. I think this is a very logical way to organize things in the philosophy department.
3808:: "A number of objective criteria can be used to determine common or self-identifying usage: * Is the name in common usage in English? (check Google, other reference works, websites of media, government and international organisations; focus on reliable sources) * Is it the official current name of the subject? (check if the name is used in a legal context, e.g. a constitution) * Is it the name used by the subject to describe itself or themselves? (check if it is a self-identifying term)"
3031:
theory may very well be a "movement", an "ideology" or a "school of thought" however those are vernacular terms, and subject to a lot of debate, not precise terms like "theory." These categories are just redundant and unnecessary in that view. Please help me straighten things out. I think by limiting ourselves to accounting for the idea in the "theories" category tree and the social entities in "movements" it will result in a wonderfully organized philosophy department, quite frankly.
4059:
but don't come over here and start pretending that people "don't really feel they have to ref material." Come on over and read the whole thing on the talk page. It should be pretty obvious that the person who is complaining about refs has added exactly 0 refs to the article herself, and then complaining that the established editors have made many good contributions to wikipedia, and who are actively working on improving, including refs, etc, aren't doing it fast enough.
339:). I have neither the time nor the expertise to deal with this article more directly than I already have right now, quite aside from the fact that two users can easily out-revert one, especially when the two are each on track to set personal monthly editcount records. Thus, I bring this to your attention in the hope that, if you truly find the article to be that important, some one or more of you who know more about it than I do can make the changes necessary to achieve
936:- I recommend going even farther by including aesthetics and political philosophy under ethics. This limits the categories to the traditional four. Aesthetics might seem like a strange choice for a category of ethics, but ethics broadly construed is concerned with value and what is good, and philosophical issues of aesthetics (going back to Plato) often concern its relationship to morality. I also propose that philosophy of language be categorized under logic.
1722:) insisting that a paragraph on Rands "solution" to the above problem being inserted in the article. Two editors have reversed but but the matter is now on the talk page (to avoid an edit war). Issues raised are those of Weight and Notability and we are being told that "Ayn Rand is a highly notable philosopher, and propogating her onto Philosophy pages make emminent sense". Involvement by other editors would be appreciated, but I realise its asking a lot. --
3961:
But alas, sometimes the articles are not too bad. Objectivity isn't so favored as a consensus of subjectivity. I guess I agree. The real problem are wikipedians who think wikipedia needs to be consise (It's the fucking internet you retards! If I want to write an article on blue M&Ms and want it to be 8,000,000 words long, who the fuck cares? Is there a lack of space??)and idiots who think SOME sources opinions are inferior to others (their own).
31:
2001:"Bumping" this request. I've started to clean up this article by removing material about "general applications" of objectivity and about the idea of "neutrality". These issues are covered by separate articles, and needn't be covered at length in an article about the philosophical concept of Objectivity. Would some folks with a good grounding in epistemology take a look at this article? While we're at it, perhaps we could improve
686:). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found
4446:. Whether it will still be there five minutes from now is questionable considering recent edits (someone moved it to a title identifying a different topic, then deleted all of the material and replaced it with a short silly list of unrelated things, not at all intended as a disambiguation page, all apparently in good faith; if this becomes an edit war you may need to look at histories to see the page I'm referring to).
883:
see the thrust of your changes in categories, the pattern - so it seems ad hoc. Why not set out a programme of change and if a group of editors, say six, agree, then you can proceed with confidence and support rather than in the face of objections. The controversies that you arouse and the criticisms you receive are the price you pay for going it alone; you must choose and then lie in the bed you have made for yourself
4920:. Outline of philosophy could use improvement, such as the multi length columns, some hierarchical structure, etc being fixed, and it may be better off as a list (it doesn't meet the outline projects outline requirements, anyway). I'll also note that the lead violates the GFDL by being an unattributed, modified, copy of the Philosophy article lead, which should have been noted on both pages.
1645:
be that philosophical texts refer to the "isms" on the list but that cdoes not make them a pholosophical theory. Philosphers disuss mathematics, trees, wordsm &c but that does not make them phosophical theories. Similalary even of philophers have mentioned or discuused
Capitalism, Expressionism, Cubism that does not make them philosophical terms or theories. --
3334:
likely only accessible to a few, what is ideal is that people can find the 'stuff' using the 'categories' that come to their individual mind in their own invdividual context. They should not have to use a glossary to find out that you call schools of though ... theories, they should be able to use schools of thought which are different than theories. etc. --
2207:, where an editor is having trouble separating the fact that an expert wrote a fairly detailed description of a (completely unfounded) idea from the idea itself ("woman trapped in a man's body", by the way). The expert rejects the idea -- the whole point of the named source is to point out the many flaws in the idea -- but an editor keeps describing
3072:(which should be renamed theories) should serve in that capacity. In fact I think it is so good it should serve as the basis of several other lists broken out by branches and fields of philosophy. I think that would be infinitely more useful than merely a long alphabetical list. That glossary should be the flagship of any efforts in this area.
518:
378:, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.
2339:
about your topic GAs then an outside reviewer. As a result, reviewing your project's articles would improve the quality of the review in ensuring that the article meets your project's concerns on sourcing, content, and guidelines. However, members can also review any other article in the worklist to ensure it meets the GA criteria.
3480:. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are
2761:. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are
2173:. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are
1067:. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are
3825:, the categories to which the article belongs (Epistemology, Freethought, Humanism, Humanist Associations, Humanists, and Social theories), and the projects to which the article belongs (WikiProject religion, WikiProject atheism, and WikiProject philosophy). The continued attempts to change the focus of the article fit what
3034:
In organizing things so as to have a category for everything we have "philosophers", "literature" "theories" in every branch. I also propose we also have "concepts" so as to diffuse others out of the branch categories. What I do not want to see is "x terminology." and "x movements." "Terminology" is
2711:
i have no issue with the second, but the 1st and 3rd are entirely different sets of things. History of ideas is not the history of philosophy and if the history of ideas is written like a history of philosophy then it needs marked as needs improvement. abstract objects are not concepts, though some
2505:
I am open minded to any color. If we come to a consensus about a three color scheme I will make the changes. (I am not overly enamored with the orange either.) I just would like a consistent and unique look. Currently the scheme is A) ffac2f B) ffcc7f C) ffddaa. Obviously B and C are lighter versions
2338:
We are always looking for new members to assist with reviewing the remaining articles, and since this project has GAs under its scope, it would be beneficial if any of its members could review a few articles (perhaps your project's articles). Your project's members are likely to be more knowledgeable
1639:
Capitalism
Careerism Communism Anthropomorphism Collectivism Consumerism Creationism Cubism Defeatism Egalitarianism Environmentalism Equalitarianism Ethnocentrism Expressionism Externism Extropianism Fascism Fideism Freudianism Gnosticism Humanism Islamism Jainism Jansenism Jonesism Judaism Legalism
1224:
Greetings folks, I attached the whole task force system to the assessment scheme originally. Any member of the project can make an assessment. Any changes appear in the "logs" which are one general log for all of philosophy and logs also broken up into task force areas. People should be encouraged to
814:
It appears from the discussion that you made controversial changes with scant prior discussion over a short period of time. Surely the amount of discussion and the time allowed for it should be in due proportion to the strength of the controvesy. I would suggest revert changes to the prior staus quo
436:
For starters, how about if we create different sections for the various kinds of amoralism? I propose the following categories: moral relativism, moral anti-realism, moral fictionalism, emotivism, hedonism. People could each volunteer to write a section. Are there more views that should be added?
4605:
It seems to me that the POV is that basically, philosophy, philosophical logic, and metalogic are unimportant to what they care about. That would ordinarily be fine. However, it does not justify the deletion and removal of content which is of concern to philosophy academics. What I am saying is that
4074:
Actually my complaint was someone (who I mistakenly thought was you) writing "In general, editors should try and find references if they feel references are lacking, rather than assuming bad faith." And I do NOT want to become an expert on the topic so thought I'd see if any here. If you look at how
3960:
I would say "pet lies" is around 40% of marginially trafficked articles and nearly 90% of any article specific to a small cultural group such as minor
Scientology, Jehova Witness, Objectivist, ect. Where only they would care. That's the problem for having a "one stop shop for facts" on the internet.
3802:: "When there is a well-known primary topic for an ambiguous term, name or phrase, much more used than any other topic covered in Knowledge to which the same word(s) may also refer, then that term or phrase should either be used for the title of the article on that topic or redirect to that article."
3164:
I don't like that you are trying to remove classifications. Adding classifications and rearranging them is fine. But removing a bona fide classification of things that exist in the real world is not a good idea. Topics can be 2 things at the same time. They can be both "theories" and "schools of
2636:
I think we should just stick with the preview blue theme color and temporary keep the groups on history section as non-transparent. Mainly because the
Schools section is still require a lot of categorization. To me, it look way more confusing when the sections are alternating without a purpose. Also
1644:
To convince us, please cite any reputable philosophy text book, academic journal or fair equivalent that discuss the following as philosphical theories or use them as philosophical terms(if that is what an "ism" is supposed to be) for the following examples: Careerism, Consumerism, Legalism. It may
1026:
This is a strange set of top level categories. I suppose "Marxism" during its 1917-89 period of apparent success might qualify as a tradition, albeit one largely of the spectacle of tenured academics doing ten gyrations around base and superstructure before breakfast. But what of the first two? Note
846:
Say you know
Philogo this repudiation of my actions is undeserved and nonconstructive. I solicited input in this forum for half a month. You can portray it as if there was no input, that it's controversial and I'm just off on my own all day. You should be ashamed of yourself. I'm over here trying to
3333:
I appreciate your reasoning... the problem though is that categories are not categories in the sense of say dewey decimal numbers, but they are categories in the sense that people find them useful. as such having a strict programmatic hierarchy isn't the goal, neither is analytic clarity, which is
3206:
which I started was deleted). We will not be able to organize around "isms." Please lets be absolutely clear: YES they are all theories, every one of them. I don't know what more I can do for you if you do not accept that reality. The term "theory" is precisely and clearly defined specifically for
3022:
I have been organizing articles under theories for some time now. It has been working out quite wonderfully up to this point. There are categories for "epistemological theories," "and "x theories," etcetera for every branch of philosophy. Using this method, I have been able to identify areas where
2354:
or has a significant impact on the process, s/he will get an award when they reach that threshold. With ~1,300 articles left to review, we would appreciate any editors that could contribute in helping to uphold the quality of GAs. If you have any questions about the process, reviewing, or need help
2094:
of this article. In the
Italian Knowledge it wasn't removed, but many doubts remained (please see the discussion of the Italian article). In Poland Italian philosophy isn't very good known, so we probably can't verificate it. Maybe you have any ideas? (Personally I think that this article is a hoax
1985:
is in serious need of some attention. For instance, Hegel and Marx aren't even mentioned in the current version of the article. I've started to draft a short section on feminist criticism of "assumed objectivity" (as in MacKinnon and
Hasslanger). In general, however, epistemology isn't really my
882:
When you leave aside the rhetoric in what you say, not much is left. Your rhetoric is is either insulting to individuals (as above) or to "clubs" being the term you apply to more than one person who disagrees with you or queries you (e.g. "Maths Club" and recently "Philosophy club". I cannot really
4977:
effectively originated the concept of human rights. (To summarize, this is a fringe theory promoted by the late Shah of Iran in the 1970s as part of his regime's propaganda and has subsequently been promoted by
Iranian ultranationalists, particularly in the pro-Shah diaspora. Mainstream historians
4058:
apply (and I clearly laid out why). I also disagree with you to the extent that "references" require superscripted little numbers versus in-text citations, like to books that have their own wikipedia pages already. If your comments are effective in getting some more eyes on
Libertarianism, great,
4024:
used to be total WP:OR and after many warnings deleted much of it. Now someone has come in with more references, but doesn't feel they really have to ref material so I'm sure a lot of it is WP:OR. Anyway, if anyone wants to take a quick look and encourage the person to better ref their material.
3812:
In an attempt to show a most common, most popular, and primary usage for the term "humanism," I've posted top lists of search results of best-selling books, web pages, multiple news sites, magazines, and organizations. In response, my repeated requests for evidence that AHD definition 1 is NOT the
1886:
An article on an important subject that tends to cause a number of debates. As one source states "there is no consensus among scholars or citizens as to exactly what a republic is" and untangling the various sometimes contradictory definitions is always complicated. I've been doing some work on it
1736:
I do not consider Ayn Rand to be a "highly notable philosopher" and have seen no evidence to the contrary. In any case I did not consider the deleted paragraph to have made any useful or interesting contribution to the subject, the is-ought problem. For these two reasons I delted the paragraph in
1183:
I admit that vandalism was maybe a bit strong, the first edit by that IP had no edit summary, so I reverted it on that ground, (as I could not see how the article rating had suddenly changed across all projects), then the same IP made the same changes with a small edit summary but no discussion on
4915:
gives us the power to use several schemes, presenting the data in the most logical way for each article, or even each section. The problem as I see it is the ownership of "outlines" and "lists" displayed by some members of teh outline project, and I welcome more input from the wikipedia community
1517:
Capitalism
Careerism Communism Anthropomorphism Collectivism Consumerism Creationism Cubism Defeatism Egalitarianism Environmentalism Equalitarianism Ethnocentrism Expressionism Externism Extropianism Fascism Fideism Freudianism Gnosticism Humanism Islamism Jainism Jansenism Jonesism Judaism
1230:
The importance ratings I have assigned are based on whether or not I could reasonably believe that an article's topic would be covered in some class within a baccalaureate program in philosophy. There are a LOT of unassessed articles, and I have been moving them up slowly usually straight to MID.
3030:
find an appropriate place for them. This doesn't work under "schools of thought", "ideologies" (and "movements" only works for theories with significant followings). Do you see how, by starting with the highest level of abstraction, and working inward we are best able to categorize. A particular
1201:
As I see it, the wikiproject assessment system basically operates on the principle that assessments are too obscure to be interesting to pov-pushers and other rogue editors, so that only "experts" associated with wikiprojects will care enough to set them. If that obscurity ever seriously breaks
4870:
Could we get some comment on this issue from some members of this project? There is an editor on a campaign to rid WP of all outlines. "Outlines" would seem to be a more evolved form of list, and so I cannot understand the motivations to devolve. It is my hope to nip this in the bud before this
2866:
The article on Being and Nothingness appears to be highly confused. Not being an expert myself I do not wish to attempt to improve the article- rather, I have a suggestion for the specific segment on 'Sex'- Nathan Oaklander's article 'Sartre on Sex' (The Philosophy of Sex: Contemporary Readings
4093:
page will probably help, and asking you to become an expert in, what is in all fairness a kind of esoteric field of academic philosophy, is not fair. I know that Peter is working to improve the article, and from working with him on previous philosophy articles in wiki-world, I know that he is
172:
I also expressed concerns with the mess Information article is in at the related discussion page. I have invited mathematically minded Wikipedians and I invite you. All we need is a tentative agreement and further refinements will make Knowledge shine. (I read, in New Scientist I believe, that
4742:
This page needs a very hard work because there are so many questions that haven't been answered since the ancient Greece time or at least one school has said that they've got the answer of it and another school hasn't agreed with it.I would rather say since the problem is unsolved it's called
3702:
adequately discusses Plato's hylomorphism (or, if it doesn't, then it should). And, at any rate, when modern philosophers debate the merits of "hylomorphism" as an alternative to materialism and dualism, they're generally talking about Aristotelian hylomorphism. (I, for one, have always heard
3766:
Over the past few years, one particularly tendentious editor attempts every few months to change the primary focus of the article, sometimes in favor of AHD definition 4, sometimes in favor of definition 5. Each time, I attempt to respond by showing the common use in best-selling books, news
1242:
In general the stubs are easy to identity. For myself, I have never assigned anything higher than a B, and then only once. This is as high as can be given without a formal process. There is a rubric published on the assessment page which probably needs to be re-written at least a little too.
3855:
if I suffer burnout after investing many months into WikiProject Philosophy? Knowledge operates through consensus, which I feel is a good thing. Is this a bad thing, however, for maintaining neutral encyclopedia articles on philosophy? I am a good writer with strong rhetorical skills and
471:
is listed as coming under your remit, I thought I would raise the question here. You can see that this article is also under the remit of the WikiProject group for Christianity, who have rated it as low importance on the importance rating scale. It also states that the WikiProject group for
3864:
editors who simply volunteer in order to plant their "pet lies" into Knowledge. I guess what I'm asking, is if this niche of Knowledge is highly ethical? An altruistic editor can never be as productive, nor powerful, as a quid pro quo editor. Knowledge's survival depends on facilitating
1576:
animals that include dogs on it on the grounds that a dog is an animal of some sort. Makes no sense at all. (BTW do you Really think that consumerism is a "a theory in some field"?) Meanwhile my proposal is that the list of items above should not be in the current article under the current
160:
Thanks for rating the proposal to rewrite the Percept article. I assume that I can copy the rating to the actual article when I rewrite it. However, there are no Wikipedians yet willing to tackle the philosophical part that needs a more professional approach and I would like to see some
4597:
was created from a split, and for the first time all this wonderful content is safe and covered. However, this is apparently not an acceptable solution for certain people. They want to travel along into the philosophy department and give us heavy-handed treatment with our own articles.
3667:, for the expression is commonly used to describe an imperfect catch-all category of last resort. Can anyone help me improve it (or merge it with an existing article that I overlooked)? It seems to belong in this neck of the woods, rather than under scientific classification per se.
3035:
a junk category to use to hold articles before they are properly organized. Adding "movements" at the lower levels will double the clutter. I think at that level we must chose between "movements" and "theories" and not do both. In this regard "theories" makes eminent sense as well.
3201:
I share you interest in the whole area of interest. However, I don't know what to tell you at this point. I think you should let go of the "isms" which is a vernacular term. We should organize around the precise technical term "theory", especially in the category structure (please
4414:
and haven't had a single comment. While I didn't really expect a bunch of philosophers to make a decision on anything, I thought at least there would be some lively debate on my orphaned text on Metaphysics.Ā ;-) If no one shows up soon I'm just going to dump the whole thing into
4601:
The way I see it, either have a comprehensive article which includes coverage from all academic areas, or split the article so that each academic area can cover their own material. This would seem to be a very simple matter of decency, fairness and interdisciplinary coverage.
3536:
There are several new portals and templates which have been created and updated recently. They can use some development and attention. The portals are set up so as to rotate between articles. If anyone thinks an article should be featured, it's easy to put it in the line up.
1134:
Ratings should really be given by people with experience in a project -- in particular not by unregistered editors. Note though, FFMG, that your edit summaries misuse the word vandalism, which should only be used for edits that deliberately intend to deface an article.
1508:" (unless we stretch the word "relating" so that the list could include almost anything). A lot of them would be better placed in articles relating to theology, economics, lit crit etc. If we do not prune we might as well rename the article "list of words that end in
3777:: Knowledge articles should begin with a good definition and description of one topic, however, they should provide other types of information about that topic as well. The full articles that the wikipedia's stubs grow into are very different from dictionary articles.
4890:
It would be more neutral to say that there are some editors trying to make all lists into outlines, and some resisting that. I haven't seen anyone trying to get rid of all outlines. My view is it should be decided case by case based on the nature of the content.
3979:
Just a note that I have cautioned this editor about incivility. I see no evidence of previous warnings, so I don't think anything more needs to be done at this point, although it would be nice if Sanitycult would revise the more objectionable parts of the message.
4906:
Certainly I'm not trying to delete all outlines. The outline project needs to have its position and remit clarified, and the renaming of lists should cease until this is established. I've yet to see any pros given for outlines over lists. For example, outlines per
3813:
most popular use of "humanism" have been met only by occasional single web pages or books that were hand-picked specifically for their biased POV, rather than algorithmically selected for their popularity as Google, Amazon, Alexa, and the other sources I've cited.
381:
All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. ā
3889:, and I have seen little concerted attempts to maintain biased articles. You might have difficulty attracting collaborators, but I would say you have a good chance of being able to radically improve articles without obstruction if you so chose. Hope this helps,
2473:
I agree with restoring the white/gray colourscheme for the main project at least. The orange is rather jarring and does not aid navigation. Perhaps there could be a slight alteration for the taskforces, but I'm not sure if there's much benefit in such branding.
421:
is in dire need of help. Most of the article was just OR essays, and I gutted most of it. With your help, I would like to reconstruct it as a proper article. Really, it is probably the single worst article I have seen on this website that isn't pure vandalism.
3816:
Could someone who is familiar with the most popular use of the word "humanism" AND mindful of Knowledge policies provide feedback? The focus of the article and its definitions have been established long before I came around, as evidenced by the contents of
5457:
The page will be updated monthly with new data. The edits aren't marked as bot edits, so they will show up in watchlists. You can view more results, request a new project be added to the list, or request a configuration change for this project using the
5248:
So mentor me already...the article was an irrational mess prior to the re-write...in fact it really didn't represent very much about judaism at all. In your opinion, what should happen. As my profile reflects, I am new at this. Naive? yes....stupid?
168:
I already expressed some concerns with the current Consciousness article. We will have to address many recent scientific findings to clarify the concept. And this would require cooperation between philosophically and psychologically minded Wikipedians.
2458:, suggesting that in the future each task force should have its own color scheme). I'd prefer we returned to a default scheme (grey or blue), or use something a lot less dramatic/garish/subjective than the strong orange. Thoughts from anyone else? --
1225:
watchlist the logs for the areas they care about. Anytime an article has a parameter change by more than two, it appears in bold. This has been a mental guide for me to try to designate the ratings with the idea that I should be off no more than one.
2726:
The prevailing view is that concepts can be explained as either abstract objects or mental representations, however some people do not believe in the one or the other way as legit. Rename to concepts avoids this. I see it as a legitimate criticism.
3277:
I used to see it your way about "isms", but now I realize that there is a better way. Nobody who is looking for "isms" or "schools of thought" is going to be mystified to find them organized under theories. They will find what they are looking for
2347:
2325:
1340:
I have proposed new text for intro on consciousness article on the related discussion pages. I think that I managed to articulate it in line with the latest findings in psychology and neurology, but would like others to review it and comment.
4110:
has the background to help out, but his Department Chair won't let him until he gets tenure! In any case, let's hope that a few others will help out, if even just by going to the SEP article and adding references where appropriate. Cheers,
1752:
Agreed, but I know this editor of old, he will continue to revert on a 2:1 vote. He is tenacious in inserting claims about Ayn Rand in different philosophy articles. We need other editors engaged at least briefly please to sort this out.
5222:
activity has ballooned to 200k, and still growing; in a style that is simply not Knowledge; with digressions into how what became the Islamic world didn't have any cultural thought apart from Judaism pre 700 CE; and simply no focus at all.
4814:
A number of art schools/movements are currently included in the philosophy project under the Aesthetics task force. I've actually been meaning to bring it up as I don't believe articles such as this one should be included in the Philosophy
875:
remember to nominate the category for discussion before making substantial deletions from or edits to the category. It's virtually impossible to "discuss" a category and how it has been used when it has been completed changed just prior to
822:
remember to nominate the category for discussion before making substantial deletions from or edits to the category. It's virtually impossible to "discuss" a category and how it has been used when it has been completed changed just prior to
5189:
It looks like this is resolved for now. Let us know if the problem arises again. Is there anything from the deleted--and clearly excessive--material that might be worth keeping? Perhaps the misanthropy in literature (could be a separate
1737:
question but this was initially reverted on the grounds of vandalism. The editor who revereted does not appear to have much knowledge of the topic in hand, nor of philosphy in general so I do not accept his reversion as one of expertise--
3880:
Greetings, and thanks very much for your interest in contributing! In response to your question, I would say that the encyclopaedia's philosophy articles are of rather poor quality, not very comprehensive, and in some specific instances
2351:
2331:
3308:
I wouldn't worry too much about messing around with the glossary. However, I think we should think big and consider the possibility of several by field each one of which could be a featured list someday. It's not so undoable. (see also
4208:
of different concepts of perfection; on the other, the ethics/aesthetics/ontology/theology sections are taken directly from one author. The notes section says it best: 119 citation to Tatarkiewicz, and 0 to all other authors combined.
3120:
The multi-page glossary you are envisioning can be built without getting rid of the current one. Though it is going to take some dedicated editors. Without those, it's just a pipe dream, because casual editing will never get the job
583:
tags, and will leave a note on the articles talk page and the creators talk page. If we don't hear anything from them, or see improvements in the citations, in the next 7 days, I'll try recommending it for deletion. I see that your
1622:
Philago, they are philosophical terms that are isms, well, at least most of them are. I'm in the process of adding references to the glossary to establish that the terms you have listed above fall within the field of philosophy.
3914:. Hopefully, I'll never run into an editor like that if I just volunteer and contribute to an extremely narrow niche of philosophy articles. I'll bite the FA review task from the "To do" tab and make it my priority this month.
3790:: "The threshold for inclusion in Knowledge is verifiability, not truthāthat is, whether readers are able to check that material added to Knowledge has already been published by a reliable source, not whether we think it is true."
135:
Iām proposing to rewrite Percept article. My proposal is at the related discussion page. Blue is looking at disambiguation from IT perspective, but we lack a good philosophical perspective. (The current text is a bit disjointed.)
3437:. Since FOL is a core logical concept that is of common interest to both philosophers and mathematicians, it would be good for someone to review the article and give a philosopher's perspective on CBM's work.Please comment on
1236:
The whole scheme is at a phase still where the articles should all trending up in both ratings and importance. This is because we are formulating the baseline of the assessment itself to some degree since we still have so many
1231:
This is for two reasons: A) We have Top, High, Mid, Low, and None to work with, so that is a pretty broad range and B) I am thinking that LOW should be saved for very questionable ones that get moved out of unassessed somehow.
2816:
as part of the GA Sweeps project. I have found the article does not meet current GA Criteria. As such I have placed the article on hold pending work that needs to be done to bring it up to current standards. My review is
2603:
I have toned down the tone on the scheme. However, I am still open to redoing it if there is a movement on a particular scheme. I am intrigued by the thesis that the "color of philosophy is brown" as posited in one of those
4554:
into a disambiguation page (again, quite sensible I suppose.) But then someone else objected that many of the entries shouldn't be on a Dab page, but instead of deleting the superfluous entries, he/she pointlessly created
1688:
This is to let people know that there is only a day or so left on a poll. The poll is an attempt to end years of argument about autoformatting which has also led to a dispute about date linking. Your votes are welcome at:
5392:
1546:, etcetera). Perhaps if we organized the glossary around only the four major core areas Ethics, Metaphysics, Epistemology, and Logic we could address your concern. Perhaps also it is a time for a glossary for each area.
2077:
I'd like to take a notice of this article to English-speaking wikipedians. In the Polish Knowledge we're thinking, that it's a hoax (Tamagnone was born in 1937, started writing books around 2000, there are virtually no
2566:
3355:
I'm not sure enough to change it myself, but it seems to me, that the article at most captures a single aspect of the topic (the intro sentence seems already to confess this). AFAIK the hypothetical syllogism is just
3473:
2343:
2315:
164:
I have also decided to harden my nudge-nudge approach in Perception article, as a next step, and would like to include some philosophically minded views. Please visit the related discussion page and add your views.
330:
have made several attempts to redirect it to other tangentially related topics. Both seem to think it better to make the article go away than to actively encourage anyone to fix it (see their comments and mine at
4695:. The "problem" of free will for example is not really a problem for many philosophers. To say that it hasn't been solved yet seems to insult all those who have given definitive answers in the past. Any thoughts?
5562:
Unfortunately, the AfD has gotten few responses and seems like it will expire with no action taken. I'd appreciate it if some interested folks could comment on the AfD (either for or against) before it expires.
3390:
Now it seems, and this part I can judge least, contemporay usage in English language texts has completely shifted to the former case ("QāR, PāQ gives PāR"). But even then, the original usage should be mentioned.
5352:
2281:
There is currently a discussion regarding how much material regarding certain matters of the subject's private life should be included in the article above. A request for comment on the subject can be found at
1533:
I agree that "ism" is not a good organizing principle for a page like this. I also agree with some but not others on your list. I think each of them is in fact a theory in some field. I proposed renaming it to
3282:
because there will not be some to be found in one place, and some found in other places. Right now they are all over the place. It's a mess. There is no reason for it. I've gone through hundreds of these. Is
2821:. I am notifying all interested projects and editors of the possibility that the article will be delisted if work is not done in the next week. Please contact me on my talk page if you have any questions.
1924:
I did change it. In general, almost all of the fallacies and paradoxes are in the "mid" range. You don't have to be bashful about those ratings. Any member of the project can change them. Please do. Be well,
5536:
5525:
472:
philosophy have yet to rate the article for importance, but I wonder whether you would also be happy to rate the article as low importance. I certainly think that there should be an article on Koyama in
815:
and leave a month for discussion, your intitiating same by setting out dispassionately the pros and cons expressed hitherto. That would be in keeping with the following that makes a lot of sense to me:
1033:"It is difficult to identify non-trivial claims that would be common to all the preceding philosophical movements. The term "continental philosophy", like "analytic philosophy", lacks clear definition"
2166:
1595:
However they are not theories in any field as much as theories in individual people's minds. I agree that it is not good for the glossary. However it may fit somewhere in the theories category tree.
709:, which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the
1116:
1100:
Does anybody know how such ratings are given? What do they mean? How does such an obscure and fairly unknown group get an 'medium' importance rating? What are the requirements for low and/or high?
5386:
5378:
5328:
3865:
pragmatism, but if I were to rejoin, I would never venture outside a specific subset of article content, and would never leave until every article I contributed to became a featured article.
2754:
5438:
5340:
5167:
I tried cleaning up this article yesterday by removing the trivia, removing a few things from the intro, removing items from the 'see also list' and removing part of the philosophy section.
4216:
or some gentler method; I leave that to your discretion. But the current state of the article is extremely poor: the article doesn't seem to even merit its C-class rating from your project.
375:
5322:
4669:
1909:
I just noted that this article has been rated as Low-importance. In light of the importance of vagueness in philosophy I'd say that this article should be rated at least Mid-importance.
5426:
906:
category by limiting it only to Logic, Epistemology, Ethics, Metaphysics, Social and Political philosophy, and Aesthetics. All the other "philosophies of" I am proposing to put into a
5432:
5418:
5406:
5366:
4583:
5444:
5400:
5360:
4768:
4407:
4400:
3733:
article needs some attention from some editors with knowledge of Knowledge's goals and policies. American Heritage Dictionary gives five widely varying definitions of the term (see
2335:
has been created, detailing which articles are left to review. Instead of reviewing by topic, editors can consider picking and choosing whichever articles they are interested in.
5372:
5334:
4911:
impose a rigid structure on the page, and a rigid naming scheme, which often is not the best way to present data or name the article ("Outline of circles" for a recent example).
4252:
1604:
1315:
796:
5346:
1672:. The article meets each of these. As examples of the notability of the class of things known as "philosophical isms", I've supplied references on the glossary's talk page.
2487:
Personally, I like the color, I only wonder whether it's orange or yellow.Ā ;) Question: Isn't there a guideline stating something about accessibility for color blind readers?
5412:
2971:
2938:
2904:
2690:
2681:
2672:
1275:
problems. I'm asking for people with knowledge of philosophy and other closely related subjects to assess the notability of the articles' subjects. Articles in question are:
4838:
I think it would be best to restrict "aesthetics" to "philosophy of art" for the purposes of tagging, though that is something that the task force members ought to decide.
2413:
A few of this project's templates were recently colored a bright orange. I object to this, and am wondering if anyone else does, or if I'm just being grumpy. Specifically:
4138:
3994:
What's objectionable about it besides my inability to be wishy washy and disengenious? At least people know where I'm coming from and that I can't spell or be gramatical.
3094:
But the isms aren't all schools, and they aren't all theories. But they are all isms. Anyone looking for the isms of philosophy can find most of them in that glossary.
853:
Please do state your opinion below one way or the other explicitly. When there are five votes either way we will act on the result at CFD. Let's see how long it takes.
5304:
After a recent request, I added WikiProject Philosophy/Medieval and others to the list of projects to compile monthly pageview stats for. The data is the same used by
1060:
97:
89:
84:
5079:
I requested lists of popular pages for some of the task forces a while back (ancient,medieval,philosophers,literature,religion). We should get some data next month.
770:
72:
67:
59:
4531:
What is this list supposed to be? I think it should either be deleted or renamed and reworked. I don't think the title is specific enough as it is. Any thoughts?
2200:
from bulls) is a 'bad word' (impolite). "Therefore," the manure itself is a bad thing (ineffective as a fertilizer? impolite to mention at the garden center?).
5313:
4606:
YOU CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS. If it turns out that this article is deleted, I will expect the content to be preserved and merged into the formal language article.
4504:
3508:
702:
4794:, and thought I'd let you know that the Brandywine School is a minor school (movement?) in painting. If it is also a school of philosophy, please let me know.
2844:
and assess whether this article is noteworthy. Perhaps it can be improved. See the talk page. Perhaps it is not notable, and should be suggested for deletion. --
4718:
is currently redirected) would deal with this better? Certainly deals with your issue of some problems not being, well, problems to various schools of thought.
4665:
2119:
1954:
976:
4174:"Large, comprehensive"? It's large, all right, but it's largely a list of disconnected quotes. The article looks far from encyclopedic in its current state.
5254:
Perhaps you can agree that goofing on people is not nearly as constructive as direct first-contact prior to going public with criticisms that never got to me.
209:) has been making numerous edits to basic philosophy articles that to my eye contain a bunch of misinformation and bad grammar. I've reverted the changes to
3910:
by a quid pro quo editor that actually did honest and highly productive work for lots of other articles outside of the one or two articles in which he had a
1538:. We can also direct your concern Philogo to this organization by considering the content of each of the "theories" categories in each of the major fields, (
717:
to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Knowledge:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at
3919:
3870:
1690:
1288:
336:
3762:
Recently, an editor added a disambiguation page to direct readers to the different types of humanism, and added the appropriate hat-note to the article.
1035:. Not a very solid basis on which to tighten definition? And that is as one would expect from any category which throws together Heidegger and Adorno.
3829:
calls, "their edits occur over a long period of time; in this case, no single edit may be clearly disruptive, but the overall pattern is disruptive."
2983:
2917:
2196:
What is the name for the error that confuses the name of an object with the object itself? For example, the argument runs like this: (one name for
3568:
2998:
5554:
the term "burden of proof" is sometimes used to describe another fallacy (which this article is *not* about), but that fallacy is better known as
2138:
173:
Wikipedians are quite conservative, orthodox or just repeating what they learned in school. Personally, I think that we should fight this image.)
3609:
I have conducted a reassessment of this article's GA status. I have placed the reassessment on hold as there are some points to be addressed at
3915:
3866:
3477:
2758:
2170:
1064:
4277:
2638:
2950:
2437:
1660:
Gregbard, "organizing principle" has nothing to do with an article's includability within Knowledge. The primary criteria for inclusion are
47:
17:
5450:
4310:. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are
3107:
I wouldn't want to see it replaced by some other page the scope of which is not specifically "isms". The page was designed for ism-seekers.
5514:
2642:
262:
3291:
remove the movement category and add the theories category in those cases. You will find there are very few which qualify as a "movement."
3260:
I don't know if I can make it any more clear. You will have to present a counterexample or I think you are reasonably compelled to agree?!
2052:. There's been a suggestion to take some of the material out and start a new article, partially motivated it seems by a desire to include
3902:
Thank you for your answer. I'll try to make one philosophy article into an FA this year because even when I semi-retired, I didn't stop
2432:
5168:
4303:
3944:
3310:
3039:
2310:
1292:
4978:
reject this viewpoint as tendentious and anachronistic.) This has previously been discussed on the fringe theories noticeboard on two
4730:
4645:
4324:
4307:
4228:
1535:
1392:
1384:
706:
698:
256:
5540:
5529:
4661:
3481:
2762:
2368:
2204:
2174:
1068:
980:
2895:. This was an unfortunate choice of name by myself. The category is not intended to describe "deductive theories" as described in
1560:
I might be better to have a list of philosophical theories, better that is than philosphicals "isms". If the article is entitled
5495:
4328:
3134:
If you go forward with the project, I suggest you add the isms last. That way, you'll avoid getting AfD'd for simply copying or
2590:
2448:
2391:
1469:
988:
110:
4940:
why? is this just more bureaucratization and wikilawering or is there really some point to constructing more rules for this? --
4715:
4556:
4528:
4054:
apply, in so many words, both on the talk page and in my edit summary. What I disagree with is that the stricter standards of
3583:
984:
903:
671:
307:
4692:
3578:
3522:
3069:
2892:
2095:
made by one of the "recensents" of Tamagnone linked whitch the Italian pulishing house Clinamen, which publishes Tamagnone's
1543:
1495:
1396:
1388:
743:
675:
404:
344:
3546:
2346:
for further details and instructions in initiating a review. If you'd like to join the process, please add your name to the
1939:
Thanks. I had assumed there was a formal process attached to the project, but couldn't find the proper place. Silly me.Ā ;)
333:
Talk:Fundamental right#Remove reference to the European Union. Merge article with other long standing articles on the topic
3837:
718:
301:
274:
206:
3906:
and will just try a new niche. The battleground stuff is egregious, and I never intended to edit an article that was so
4993:
is listed as a high-importance article for this WikiProject so some input from outside editors would be appreciated. --
4589:
Owing to the repeated removal of philosophical, and metalogical, content by mathematicians and computer scientists from
4255:. If anyone is a knowledgeable about Russian philosophy or just wants to lend a hand, we could use your help. Thanks.
4090:
4021:
3647:
3005:
What's wrong with them? Explain your reasoning please, so the rest of us know what you are talking about. Thank you.
2283:
907:
2454:
I find it a lot harder to read (poor contrast), and distracting when reading anything else. (Greg already commented at
1498:
are philosophical terms or subjects and hence a fortiori not the article's declared content, i.e. " topics relating to
3573:
3179:
3058:
3006:
2963:
2896:
2818:
2182:
1868:
1832:
1673:
1624:
2226:
4477:
for the purchase of books at amazon.com, etc., etc., one of the topics mentioned is order as the opposite of chaos.
2329:
has just passed the 50% mark. In order to expediate the reviewing, several changes have been made to the process. A
4820:
Does anyone have any thoughts on this? It seems to me that most art movements are beyond the scope of our project.
3469:
3026:
I find that by organizing primarily in terms of "theories" I am able to deal with the widest range of articles and
2417:
360:
38:
5547:
the fallacy described is not discussed in philosophy, logic or critical thinking literature and hence the page is
5308:
but the program is different, and includes the aggregate views from all redirects to each page. The stats are at:
3638:? Right now it's very much a dictionary entry, unlike some of the other ethical concepts listed on its page (e.g.
1098:
has been given a 'medium' importance rating, (in Human rights, Philosophy, Africa and Urban studies and planning).
670:
subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering
4311:
3805:
3715:
3430:
2888:
1539:
5233:
Will anyone take this on? It now needs massive cleanup, and significant mentoring for the editor in question.
2506:
of A. We should address our debate to a main color, and then decide if the other two are light enough, etcetera.
1391:. There appears to have been scant prior discussion, and it is difficult to assess the wisdom of the move since
213:, but since my domain is really neuroscience, I'm not going to try to deal with the mess this editor created at
5510:
4743:
philosophy.Once it's been answered it's called science.This idea isn't always true but I think it usually is.--
4423:
myself. I can't go back to the authors of the text because nearly all of it came from anonymous users. Thanks!
3851:
I know that bias is unavoidable, and any system is prone to systemic bias. I guess what I'm really asking, is
3833:
2872:
2646:
2387:
1982:
687:
683:
661:
652:
319:
268:
5572:
5519:
5476:
5291:
5270:
5242:
5199:
5183:
5146:
5116:
5090:
5066:
5048:
5024:
5002:
4982:
4949:
4935:
4901:
4884:
4852:
4829:
4803:
4778:
4752:
4735:
4704:
4681:
4650:
4615:
4568:
4540:
4518:
4493:
4432:
4390:
4376:
4364:
4341:
4289:
4262:
4233:
4183:
4169:
4150:
4120:
4084:
4068:
4034:
4003:
3989:
3970:
3952:
3923:
3897:
3874:
3841:
3719:
3707:
3676:
3651:
3622:
3597:
3526:
3495:
3457:
3403:
3343:
3321:
3184:
3081:
3063:
3051:
3011:
2876:
2853:
2830:
2799:
2776:
2736:
2721:
2705:
2650:
2613:
2594:
2548:
2496:
2482:
2467:
2403:
2372:
2295:
2265:
2251:
2237:
2220:
2186:
2150:
2131:
2108:
2065:
2032:
2014:
1995:
1966:
1948:
1934:
1918:
1896:
1873:
1844:
1804:
1782:
1762:
1746:
1731:
1702:
1678:
1654:
1629:
1616:
1586:
1555:
1527:
1481:
1452:
1438:
1412:
1372:
1353:
1326:
1300:
1252:
1211:
1196:
1176:
1161:
1144:
1129:
1109:
1082:
1044:
1018:
1000:
964:
945:
927:
892:
862:
838:
808:
782:
764:
641:
629:
615:
597:
565:
533:
509:
446:
431:
364:
226:
185:
151:
122:
4594:
4575:
3948:
3057:
What if a reader is trying to find a list of "schools of thought"? Under your system, how will he find it?
2211:
in the article as "his" idea simply because the expert described it. Surely there's a name for this error?
2122:
and wonder if some of you could have a good luck at it. Some of the topics may qualify mainly as redirects -
5555:
5282:
has now taken on these concerns and is working to address them. Expert eyes could still be useful though.
4979:
4564:
4489:
4360:
3643:
3634:
Could someone who's more of a philosophy expert than I am (which isn't all that hard, sadly) have a look at
2442:
2274:
2256:
Thanks! I knew if I asked, that someone would be able to tell me the name. I'm off to read the article...
1296:
1284:
1166:
While it doesn't look like a philosophy article, it belongs in the project as it is within the scope of the
5031:
4973:. They claim that it is supposedly the world's first charter of human rights, and that the Persian emperor
4102:
article up to FA status, and would have been a great asset for this one too, as it's a sub-division of the
3770:
The policies I feel the tendentious editor and those he brings into the discussion are breaking are these:
5499:
5179:
5142:
5086:
4825:
4791:
4784:
4726:
4711:
4700:
4641:
4536:
4428:
4320:
4224:
4137:. I am pretty sure the proposal is another religiously motivated one. We could use some rational input at
4080:
4030:
3886:
3799:
3438:
3365:
3349:
2868:
2261:
2216:
2178:
1820:
1813:
1028:
348:
332:
250:
241:
2989:
both of these suggestions are pretty much wrong headed. how do you think these merges solve anything? --
5266:
5226:
What should be a tight, orientating introduction to some of the key figures and most important areas of
4872:
4865:
3694:
is in a rather shabby condition. Thus, I've put together a draft for a revised article and posted it on
3618:
3556:
2364:
2291:
1831:) 04:10, 19 April 2009 (UTC) Oh, and I have recorded and will be recording my progress and goals on the
1149:
1095:
755:
I signed WP:Philosophy for this program. Be looking for a links to it on the navigation templates soon.
679:
505:
4560:
3541:
3165:
thought" (isn't the latter a subcategory of the former?). The two terms are definitely not synonymous.
1401:
reversion of the move to the prior status quo pending discussion project members and others interested
4998:
3038:
So, like I said, I have put a lot of thought into it. Any help appreciated. You should also check out
1887:
today, and another user has been commenting on those changes, but extra eyes would be very welcome. -
1603:
In a related story...I have nominated Philosophical theories to be moved to "non-empirical theories" (
545:
5062:
4799:
4764:
4165:
3999:
3966:
3940:
3781:
3774:
3752:
3711:
3695:
3672:
3284:
3042:
for another idea I had. I think it may be a bit much to make a task force out of it though. Be well,
2586:
2578:
2492:
2427:
2399:
2395:
2071:
2061:
1944:
1914:
1698:
1661:
580:
5057:
Ok, I dig Bruce Lee being within the scope of this project. But 74th on a list of 4705? Ā°_^ ROFLMAO
4089:
Hi Carol, I apologize then. Sorry for jumping on you. I agree that getting a few more eyes on the
3698:. As you may notice, the draft discusses only Aristotelian hylomorphism. I believe that the article
2974:. Please support this effort to organize and otherwise tighten up the categories under Cat:Theories.
2941:. Please support this effort to organize and otherwise tighten up the categories under Cat:Theories.
2319:. The process helps to ensure that articles that have passed a nomination before that date meet the
1264:
795:
Greetings folks, I am having a hard time with the Knowledge regulars in CFD. Could I get an amen at
5505:
5042:
5036:
4846:
4840:
4371:
4157:
4116:
4064:
3822:
3734:
3551:
3387:
for "QāR, Q gives R", noting that older texts only calls the latter one "hypothetical syllogism".
3376:
3203:
2930:
2849:
2383:
2162:
2028:
2010:
1991:
1345:
1311:
1276:
941:
797:
Knowledge:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2009_March_30#Category:Philosophical_schools_and_traditions
611:
561:
442:
313:
177:
143:
196:
5467:
5112:
5020:
4994:
4880:
4775:
4748:
4677:
4611:
4546:
I think the page should probably be deleted. It started life as perfectly sensible redirect for "
4485:
4386:
4356:
4285:
4179:
4146:
4134:
3985:
3610:
3593:
3516:
3317:
3151:
Getting back to my question, how will a reader using the category system find schools of thought?
3077:
3047:
2979:
2946:
2913:
2867:
Rowman and Littlefield, 1980 might be a useful resource to help clarify this particular segment.
2813:
2806:
2795:
2732:
2701:
2609:
2544:
2463:
2146:
2127:
2104:
1962:
1930:
1840:
1828:
1823:
and would appreciate any feedback. Does anyone care about second-rate Neoplatonists anymore?Ā :-)
1612:
1551:
1360:
1349:
1322:
1248:
1207:
1187:
Putting aside this particular article, I feel that project importance should be discussed first.
1140:
996:
923:
858:
804:
778:
760:
222:
210:
181:
147:
3230:
Monist materialism:{"There exists only one fundamental substance", "The one substance is mater"}
2572:
5491:
5211:
5195:
5175:
5138:
5082:
4986:
4945:
4908:
4821:
4721:
4696:
4636:
4532:
4424:
4332:
4315:
4219:
4076:
4026:
3826:
3818:
3434:
3413:
3399:
3339:
2994:
2967:
2934:
2826:
2787:
2717:
2257:
2247:
2212:
1800:
1778:
1758:
1742:
1727:
1650:
1582:
1523:
1477:
1448:
1408:
1368:
1157:
1014:
960:
915:
888:
834:
637:
593:
572:
529:
427:
395:
295:
245:
237:
200:
118:
5568:
5287:
5279:
5262:
5238:
4928:
4299:
3787:
3664:
3657:
3614:
3233:
Monist idealism:{"There exists only one fundamental substance", "The one substance is mind"}
2841:
2750:
2360:
2356:
2287:
1892:
1770:
1708:
1426:
1280:
1120:
730:
585:
576:
501:
4670:
Knowledge:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2009_September_27#Category:Philosophical_traditions
2568:
5058:
4974:
4795:
4630:
4590:
4205:
4161:
4095:
3995:
3962:
3793:
3699:
3668:
3563:
3501:
3135:
2582:
2570:
2488:
2320:
2203:
In case my example isn't exactly parallel: The particular problem I'm dealing with is at
2057:
2020:
1940:
1910:
1902:
1694:
1635:
I am sory I do not agree that most of the following are philosophical terms that are isms.
1040:
4965:
A number of Iranian editors are attempting to add poorly sourced or unsourced claims to
4419:
and let you guys fight it out from there. I only speak the computer flavored version of
5259:
So mentor me already...with some helpful, constructive criticism...rather than goofing.
4970:
4912:
4626:
4514:
4416:
4336:
4273:
4112:
4060:
3890:
3857:
3491:
2845:
2772:
2712:
concepts may be abstract objects, and the inverse. the sets do not overlap though. --
2475:
2230:
2049:
2024:
2006:
1987:
1669:
1443:
I am not experienced in that kind of thing. Would you (or some other kind ed) do it? --
1433:
1287:. Please provide your insights on the talk pages of those articles and perhaps also on
1192:
1171:
1124:
1105:
1078:
1056:
937:
748:
667:
607:
557:
553:
493:
485:
438:
356:
3784:: "The same title for different things (homographs): are found in different articles."
2023:
could use a look as it doesn't really cover the original (Hegelian) sense of the term.
5487:
5464:
5108:
5016:
4876:
4772:
4744:
4673:
4607:
4382:
4370:"Ask three philosophers one simple question and you'll get five complex answers"Ā ;).
4281:
4248:
4213:
4201:
4175:
4142:
4107:
4055:
3981:
3911:
3907:
3903:
3882:
3589:
3512:
3452:
3424:
3361:
3313:
3073:
3043:
2975:
2942:
2909:
2791:
2728:
2697:
2605:
2540:
2459:
2142:
2123:
2100:
1958:
1926:
1836:
1824:
1665:
1608:
1547:
1318:
1272:
1268:
1244:
1203:
1167:
1136:
992:
919:
854:
800:
774:
756:
738:
729:
to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome
481:
468:
453:
340:
286:
218:
5548:
5191:
4990:
4966:
4959:
4941:
4892:
4551:
4547:
4411:
4352:
4051:
3861:
3691:
3683:
3395:
3357:
3335:
2990:
2822:
2713:
2306:
2243:
2002:
1796:
1774:
1754:
1738:
1723:
1646:
1578:
1519:
1473:
1444:
1419:
1404:
1364:
1153:
1010:
956:
884:
830:
633:
589:
525:
423:
385:
290:
114:
476:, but I would hardly say that this article would deserve the centrality of, say,
5564:
5283:
5234:
5161:
4922:
4047:
1888:
1859:
1468:
I propose that any future changes to Logic categegories are discussed first at
983:, limiting it to Analytic, Continental, Marxism, and Eastern, putting others in
726:
46:
If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
4075:
bad WP:OR was last time, you can see why there might be concern on this topic.
2905:
Knowledge:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2009_June_7#Category:Deductive_theories
4197:
3745:
1855:
1792:
1719:
1499:
1036:
911:
497:
489:
464:
4276:
about creating a template for Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy citations.
3860:
about allowing Knowledge to turn a few blind eyes for highly productive, yet
4509:
4103:
4099:
4046:(undent) Carol, this is a complete mis-representation. I clearly said that
3603:
3486:
2767:
2637:
I think we should really considering the Wikify Navigation in accordance to
2086:, even the very content of the article is a bit strange, espescially for an
2042:
1188:
1101:
1073:
473:
418:
411:
352:
4769:
Knowledge:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2009_October_8#Category:Georg_Hegel
5459:
4278:
Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Mathematics#Stanford_Encyclopedia_of_Philosophy
3287:
really a "movement" for instance? There are bunches of those. I certainly
1263:
Recently a couple of new philosophy related articles have been created by
4809:
As far as I can tell the Brandywine School is not involved in philosophy.
3756:
3737:), and for several years, the status of this term on Knowledge has been:
3730:
3448:
3420:
2667:
I have recently made some proposals to move, merge or rename categories.
2053:
1880:
460:
337:
Talk:Universal Declaration of Human Rights#Merger with Fundamental Rights
139:
If you are interested, please join the discussion with your suggestions.
1267:. The notability of the subjects has been disputed, as well as possible
1092:
Can someone explain to me how the various project importances are given?
5462:. If you have any comments or suggestions, please let me know. Thanks!
5393:
Knowledge:WikiProject Philosophy/Philosophical literature/Popular pages
4420:
4098:
left the project. He is the one who almost single-handedly brought the
3639:
910:
category. This change would affect the section of the same name in the
5502:. Anyone who can usefully contribute to the discussion, please do so.
4133:
There is a proposal to delete this large, comprehensive article about
2137:
That list is stellar. I think you (or someone) should copy some of to
2090:
philosopher). In French Knowledge my friend Ziel began the process of
4710:
I agree that it's not a good category -- misleading at best. Perhaps
3642:) whose articles discuss their philosophical meaning and background.
3635:
3628:
2197:
1119:. You might get a more thorough exposition by surfing the links from
214:
5013:
4633:. Please discuss at that Talk page. Examples would be appreciated!
4381:
I have tried to provide a response on the aforementioned talk page.
3741:
AHD definitions 1, 2, 3 loosely grouped under the "humanism" article
5353:
Knowledge:WikiProject Philosophy/Social and political/Popular pages
2350:. In addition, for every member that reviews 100 articles from the
1316:
Knowledge:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2009_March_30#Category:Vice
975:
I have a very similar proposal to the preceding, to tighten up the
4443:
4306:. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to
1715:
549:
477:
2863:(Not sure if I'm posting in the right place. Apologies if not).
5107:
I made requests for all the rest. I've always wanted this info.
3735:
http://dictionary.reference.com/dic?q=humanism&search=search
1564:
Theories, however the fact that an entry refers to "a theory in
1510:
1504:
2565:
Just a quick, non-representative look at opinions in the wild:
2378:
Pointer to discussion: Propositional logic or sentential logic?
2048:
Could someone please take a look at the last couple of days at
25:
5206:
Jewish Philosophy: article being turned into an almighty mess
5012:
I have requested a list of popular pages for this project at
2392:
WT:WikiProject Logic#Propositional logic or sentential logic?
588:
didn't go through, so we'll go through the full AfD process.
4442:
Knowledge has long had a lengthy disambiguation page titled
1568:
field" would not be grounds for inclusion under the heading
403:
on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at
5387:
Knowledge:WikiProject Philosophy/Philosophers/Popular pages
5379:
Knowledge:WikiProject Philosophy/Contemporary/Popular pages
5329:
Knowledge:WikiProject Philosophy/Epistemology/Popular pages
5305:
5137:
I look forward to viewing the lists. Should be interesting
3931:×× × ×××× ×××××Ŗ ×ק×Ø ×× × ×××× ×××ש××× ×× × ××××¢ ×× ×× ××¦× ××ק×Ø
3476:. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets
2757:. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets
2169:. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets
1063:. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets
500:. Could some one please look at this article? Many thanks,
5494:, a B-grade article of low-importance within the scope of
5439:
Knowledge:WikiProject Philosophy/Continental/Popular pages
5341:
Knowledge:WikiProject Philosophy/Metaphysics/Popular pages
1714:
We have an Ayn Rand supporter (the same one who attempted
244:
within your project on its talk page. Despite this fact,
5323:
Knowledge:WikiProject Philosophy/Aesthetics/Popular pages
3856:
copy-editing skills. I quit after I realized I can't be
1986:
area. Anyone else interested in working on this article?
1289:
Knowledge:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#User:Thlgnosis
5427:
Knowledge:WikiProject Philosophy/Anarchism/Popular pages
5174:. Could someone take a look at the article in question?
5030:
Thanks! There is some existing data from September 2008
3236:
Dualism:{"There exists only two fundamental substances"}
1152:
no longer appears to be listed as a Philosophy article.
628:
I've recommended the article for deletion, please visit
606:
Thanks for your help. I'll keep an eye on the article.--
552:. Could a more experienced editor help get it removed?--
5433:
Knowledge:WikiProject Philosophy/Analytic/Popular pages
5419:
Knowledge:WikiProject Philosophy/Religion/Popular pages
5407:
Knowledge:WikiProject Philosophy/Language/Popular pages
5367:
Knowledge:WikiProject Philosophy/Medieval/Popular pages
5215:
5172:
4861:"Outline" v "list" war visits the philosophy department
4584:
Knowledge:Articles_for_deletion/Formal_language_(logic)
4244:
4020:
Speaking of articles dominated by people pushing POVs.
3885:
by individual editors; there are few articles that are
3445:
Yes, please; any comments would be appreciated. āĀ Carl
2455:
2421:
2056:
in it. I think this needs a few more opinions. Thanks.
325:
280:
5451:
Knowledge:WikiProject Philosophy/Marxism/Popular pages
5445:
Knowledge:WikiProject Philosophy/Eastern/Popular pages
5401:
Knowledge:WikiProject Philosophy/Science/Popular pages
5361:
Knowledge:WikiProject Philosophy/Ancient/Popular pages
4408:
Knowledge:Requests for comment/Religion and philosophy
3227:
Monism:{"There exists only one fundamental substance"}
5490:
on a large amount of disputed content in the article
5373:
Knowledge:WikiProject Philosophy/Modern/Popular pages
5335:
Knowledge:WikiProject Philosophy/Ethics/Popular pages
4987:
Talk:Human rights#Religious tolerance and Achaemenids
4916:
rather than the outline project presenting this as a
2786:
Helo everyone! You may be interested in checking out
1259:
Notability of certain new philosophy-related articles
769:
I am very pleased with this program. Check out these
5347:
Knowledge:WikiProject Philosophy/Logic/Popular pages
5218:) a tight, well-focussed (albeit 89k) article about
5413:
Knowledge:WikiProject Philosophy/Mind/Popular pages
4351:I am a biologist/taxonomist working on the article
2433:
Knowledge talk:WikiProject Philosophy/Announcements
1494:I do not think that the following, which appear in
868:
I am not ashmed to agree with the view above quoted
4139:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Christian violence
343:on this issue. I have posted this same notice at
2284:Talk:Martin Luther King, Jr.#Request for Comments
1572:Theories. We might just as well have a list of
548:as a parody (or something) of the article on the
5230:discussion has instead become an almighty mess.
3847:Does wikipedia have bias on philosophy articles?
3755:and connection to definition 1 mentioned in the
3690:I've come to the conclusion that the article on
2355:with a particular article, please contact me or
2342:If any members are interested, please visit the
2305:This message is being sent to WikiProjects with
374:Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new
3439:Talk:First-order logic#Major revisions 2009-6-7
2899:, it is intended to house the various theories
2120:my page of missing topics related to philosophy
705:. We are also in the process of implementing a
5314:Knowledge:WikiProject Philosophy/Popular pages
4505:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Barbados Group
2205:Talk:Feminine essence theory of transsexuality
1865:These articles seem to indicate that they do.
1791:Maybe post a notification on the talk page of
4484:That topic deserves an article but has none.
4457:to be obeyed, listing things in alphabetical
3744:AHD definition 4 briefly mentioned under the
3433:) has been working to improve the article on
3207:the purpose of dealing with this very thing.
2359:and we'll be happy to help. --Happy editing!
2286:. Any input is more than welcome. Thank you.
2082:data on him in Googlebooks or Googlescholar,
1795:? Not sure how many people monitor here. --
1403:. Does anybody know how to revert a move? --
8:
2084:cross-wiki spamming and using of sockpuppets
417:Just popping in to let the people here that
4660:There is a discussion about the categories
1088:Hi/Mid/Lo Importance? what is the standard?
4969:concerning a 6th century BC artifact, the
4212:I'm not sure if this is better handled by
4160:article, so why the hell is this an issue?
1691:Knowledge:Date formatting and linking poll
1115:The importance scale is briefly explained
4763:There is a discussion about the category
4557:List of teachings attributed to Aristotle
4529:List of teachings attributed to Aristotle
3464:FAR notice for Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi
1418:I support your proposal. You need to use
773:. You should check this once in a while.
113:is (a) orphaned and (b) needs attention--
4693:Category:Unsolved problems in philosophy
3751:AHD definition 5 has its own article at
5171:undid most of my changes earlier today
2139:Knowledge:Requested articles/Philosophy
658:This is a notice to let you know about
376:WikiProject coordinators' working group
232:Fundamental rights deletion-by-redirect
4469:differential equations, architectural
3547:Portal:Social and political philosophy
2639:Template:History of Western philosophy
2309:under their scope. Since August 2007,
1514:, handy for scrabble players perhaps?
44:Do not edit the contents of this page.
3373:Studies and Exercises in Formal Logic
2438:Knowledge:WikiProject Philosophy/tab2
1684:Poll: autoformatting and date linking
18:Knowledge talk:WikiProject Philosophy
7:
4666:Philosophical schools and traditions
3178:By the way, keep up the good work.
1591:Ones like "consumerism" technically
1202:down, the system is likely to fail.
1094:I see that the mostly unknown group
977:Philosophical schools and traditions
452:Rating of importance for article on
4272:There is currently a discussion at
4268:Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
3311:User:Gregbard/Concepts and theories
3240:etcetera for every single other ism
3040:User:Gregbard/Concepts and theories
2812:I have done the GA Reassessment of
1981:It seems to me that the article on
1593:still can be described as theories.
3611:Talk:Either/Or/GA1#GA_Reassessment
1718:her definition of Philosophy into
1536:glossary of philosophical theories
1393:Glossary of philosophical theories
1385:Glossary of philosophical theories
1379:Glossary of philosophical theories
24:
5541:Burden of proof (logical fallacy)
5530:Burden of proof (logical fallacy)
4524:teachings attributed to Aristotle
4295:Thomas Jefferson GAR notification
4243:There is a dispute about whether
2390:. I have started a discussion at
2242:isn't that merely equivocation?--
981:Category:Philosophical traditions
902:I am proposing to tighten up the
693:If you are already subscribed to
571:It appears that it does not meet
4453:Besides an authority issuing an
2449:Knowledge:WikiProject Philosophy
1953:Well, you should sign up on the
1470:Knowledge talk:WikiProject Logic
989:Category:Philosophical movements
516:
111:Meaning (philosophy of language)
106:Meaning (philosophy of language)
29:
4716:Unsolved problems in philosophy
4687:Unsolved problems in philosophy
3584:Template:Philosophy of language
3569:Social and political philosophy
2641:before doing things to rash. --
2447:and the main header graphic at
1769:Lets us hope others will watch
1314:is being proposed for deletion
985:Category:Philosophical theories
573:wikipedia's notability criteria
4985:. It's now being discussed at
4790:I noticed your project box at
4736:01:15, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
4705:14:40, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
4682:20:34, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
4651:17:01, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
4616:01:05, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
4569:13:13, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
4541:15:41, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
4519:04:31, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
3579:Template:Philosophy of science
3070:Glossary of philosophical isms
2893:Category:Theories of deduction
2574:. A very slightly off-white?
2323:. After nearly two years, the
1819:I have been working lately on
1544:Category:Metaphysical theories
1496:Glossary of philosophical isms
1490:Glossary of philosophical isms
1397:Glossary of philosophical isms
1395:is now empty and redirects to
1389:Glossary of philosophical isms
751:} 09:32, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)
345:Knowledge talk:WikiProject Law
1:
5482:Rfc at Talk:Celestial spheres
4494:12:37, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
4433:00:28, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
4401:Religion and philosophy RFCs?
4391:12:46, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
4377:10:18, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
4365:10:15, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
4251:or be a separate article, at
3853:What should I know beforehand
3419:In case you haven't noticed,
3383:for "QāR, PāQ gives PāR" and
2663:Category move/merge proposals
2382:We currently have an article
719:Knowledge talk:Article alerts
405:04:38, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
365:21:46, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
227:03:05, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
186:04:55, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
152:19:12, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
123:01:01, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
5573:18:40, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
5520:15:34, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
5477:04:12, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
5292:11:28, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
5271:02:15, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
5243:17:36, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
5214:? What was previously (eg:
5210:Can somebody take a look at
5200:06:42, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
5184:18:00, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
5147:03:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
5117:01:55, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
5091:17:38, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
5067:16:11, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
5049:15:50, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
5025:15:46, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
5003:19:21, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
4950:21:02, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
4936:20:14, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
4902:20:03, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
4885:17:09, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
4853:06:23, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
4830:02:55, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
4804:02:13, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
4621:Metalogic vs Metamathematics
4091:libertarianism (metaphysics)
4022:Libertarianism (metaphysics)
3725:Help with Dispute Resolution
3474:featured article review here
2918:_Theories_of_deduction": -->
2755:featured article review here
2227:The map is not the territory
2167:featured article review here
1061:featured article review here
369:
161:interdisciplinary approach.
5558:and already has a WP entry.
4958:Fringe theory promotion at
4779:20:13, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
4753:18:37, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
4342:20:42, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
4290:22:40, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
4263:13:54, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
3574:Template:Philosophy of mind
3385:mixed hypthetical syllogism
3381:pure hypothetical syllogism
2964:Category:Schools of thought
2897:theory (mathematical logic)
2889:Category:Deductive theories
1359:replied on that talk page:
370:Coordinators' working group
195:I'd like to alert you that
5588:
4417:Gilles Deleuze#Metaphysics
4239:Russian philosophy dispute
4234:07:35, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
3511:. Help get it back to FA.
3470:Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi
2887:I have proposed to rename
2418:Template:Philosophy topics
2313:has been participating in
1897:21:18, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
1874:00:23, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
1845:04:23, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
1805:19:54, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
1783:19:47, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
1763:20:17, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
1747:11:03, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
1732:04:55, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
1703:09:40, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
1679:02:30, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
1655:12:03, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
1630:02:15, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
1617:01:57, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
1587:01:17, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
1556:01:02, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
1327:06:41, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
1301:10:30, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
1253:20:15, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
1212:16:55, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
1197:04:40, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
1177:22:34, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
1162:21:03, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
1145:20:56, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
1130:19:39, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
1110:19:36, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
1083:02:44, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
1001:21:00, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
946:21:26, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
928:21:00, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
783:06:41, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
765:02:24, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
642:11:45, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
616:15:02, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
598:08:48, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
566:02:42, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
534:22:26, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
510:21:46, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
447:17:56, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
4625:There is a discussion at
4438:Order as opposed to chaos
4304:good article reassessment
4302:has been nominated for a
4184:00:43, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
4170:00:19, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
4151:18:37, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
4121:02:40, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
4085:01:32, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
4069:23:38, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
4035:23:02, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
4004:01:18, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
3990:00:57, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
3971:00:17, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
3953:22:42, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
3720:07:21, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
3677:19:05, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
3652:09:44, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
3623:15:18, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
3598:20:17, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
3532:New portals and templates
3527:11:34, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
3496:06:34, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
3478:featured article criteria
3458:22:54, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
3344:17:07, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
2962:I have proposed to merge
2957:Schools of thought =: -->
2929:I have proposed to merge
2882:Deductive theories =: -->
2759:featured article criteria
2388:Category:Sentential logic
2311:WikiProject Good Articles
2171:featured article criteria
2114:Missing philosophy topics
1540:Category:Ethical theories
1528:00:00, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
1482:23:52, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
1453:23:56, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
1439:13:20, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
1413:13:16, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
1373:01:09, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
1354:06:58, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
1065:featured article criteria
1045:20:25, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
1019:00:47, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
965:00:46, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
893:00:42, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
863:21:55, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
839:09:24, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
809:17:52, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
713:parameter, but forget to
459:This probably relates to
432:23:43, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
347:, and made note of it at
5306:http://stats.grok.se/en/
4662:Philosophical traditions
4656:Philosophical traditions
4253:redirects for discussion
4106:article. Another user,
3924:15:37, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
3898:12:48, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
3875:11:56, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
3842:18:23, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
3708:Hylomorphism (Aristotle)
3404:11:19, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
3322:19:51, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
3185:19:11, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
3082:06:44, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
3064:04:31, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
3052:03:59, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
3012:04:31, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
3000:00:55, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
2985:22:55, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
2952:22:55, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
2919:21:30, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
2877:00:04, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
2854:12:09, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
2831:15:54, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
2800:12:27, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
2777:11:42, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
2737:15:56, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
2722:02:42, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
2706:02:24, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
2651:04:48, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
2614:21:21, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
2595:21:08, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
2549:19:02, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
2497:19:03, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
2483:18:55, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
2468:18:41, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
2404:13:54, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
2373:21:50, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
2296:14:16, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
2266:18:29, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
2252:02:52, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
2238:06:16, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
2221:17:28, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
2187:17:59, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
2151:17:28, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
971:Philosophical traditions
467:, but as the article on
5556:Argument from ignorance
5535:Hello. I submitted an
4871:person moves on to the
4629:proposing a merge with
4595:Formal language (logic)
4576:Formal language (logic)
4410:three days ago about a
4399:Is anyone watching the
2745:Bernard Williams at FAR
2691:Abstract objects =: -->
2673:History of ideas =: -->
2443:Template:Philosophy/Nav
2275:Martin Luther King, Jr.
2132:13:41, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
2109:13:41, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
2066:11:01, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
2033:11:38, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
2015:11:30, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
1996:06:04, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
1967:02:08, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
1949:00:01, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
1935:23:24, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
1919:23:13, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
979:category by creating a
5543:, on the grounds that
5496:WikiProject Philosophy
4792:Talk:Brandywine School
4785:Talk:Brandywine School
4712:Philosophical problems
4347:Request for assistance
3663:I created the article
3371:Googling around found
3366:Wissenschaft der Logik
3350:Hypothetical syllogism
1821:Porphyry (philosopher)
1814:Porphyry (philosopher)
1285:Research Centre GNOSIS
1029:Continental philosophy
904:Branches of philosophy
898:Branches of philosophy
880:
827:
697:, it is now easier to
349:Talk:Fundamental right
240:is tagged as being of
4873:Outline of philosophy
4866:Talk:Outline_of_logic
4204:. On one hand it's a
2883:Theories of deduction
2859:Being and Nothingness
2674:History of philosophy
2409:Color of this project
1905:importance assessment
1879:Opinion requested on
1862:mean the same thing?
1850:A question for you...
1670:neutral point of view
1333:Consciousness article
1150:Abahlali baseMjondolo
1096:Abahlali baseMjondolo
871:
818:
682:and other workflows (
672:Articles for deletion
544:Someone put together
42:of past discussions.
4463:Loyal Order of Moose
4308:good article quality
3912:conflict of interest
3753:Renaissance humanism
3285:Cognitivism (ethics)
3068:I think the stellar
2428:Template:WP PHIL 1.0
2301:GA Sweeps invitation
2041:Attention needed at
1383:An editor has moved
1031:article itself says
703:request new features
676:Requests for comment
575:. I marked with the
217:and other articles.
5488:request for comment
4550:". Someone changed
4247:should redirect to
4158:Christian Terrorism
4156:There is already a
3904:assuming good faith
3834:Serpent More Crafty
3823:Outline of humanism
3377:John Neville Keynes
2931:Category:Ideologies
2805:GA Reassessment of
2384:Propositional logic
2277:Request for comment
2163:Omnipotence paradox
2157:Omnipotence paradox
2118:I recently updated
1977:Objectivity Article
1955:participants roster
1277:Lars-Henrik Schmidt
908:Philosophy by field
4767:and being held at
4412:merge from Virtual
4406:I posted a RFC on
4135:Christian violence
4129:Christian violence
3806:WP:Naming conflict
3644:JiveTalkinChoirBoy
3557:Portal:Metaphysics
2814:Emanuel Swedenborg
2807:Emanuel Swedenborg
2348:running total page
2192:Name for a fallacy
2099:Bazzani's books).
1361:Talk:Consciousness
1051:Muhammad Iqbal FAR
630:the AfD to comment
211:philosophy of mind
191:problematic editor
5518:
5492:Celestial spheres
5212:Jewish Philosophy
5109:Pontiff Greg Bard
4933:
4900:
4877:Pontiff Greg Bard
4734:
4674:Pontiff Greg Bard
4649:
4608:Pontiff Greg Bard
4340:
4282:Pontiff Greg Bard
4232:
4143:Pontiff Greg Bard
3943:comment added by
3819:Template:Humanism
3590:Pontiff Greg Bard
3542:Portal:Aesthetics
3468:I have nominated
3456:
3435:first-order logic
3414:first-order logic
3364:, at least up to
3314:Pontiff Greg Bard
3181:The Transhumanist
3138:the ism glossary.
3074:Pontiff Greg Bard
3060:The Transhumanist
3044:Pontiff Greg Bard
3008:The Transhumanist
2976:Pontiff Greg Bard
2968:Category:Theories
2943:Pontiff Greg Bard
2935:Category:Theories
2924:Ideologies =: -->
2910:Pontiff Greg Bard
2840:Please look over
2788:Africana womanism
2782:Africana womanism
2749:I have nominated
2729:Pontiff Greg Bard
2698:Pontiff Greg Bard
2682:Criticisms =: -->
2606:Pontiff Greg Bard
2598:
2581:comment added by
2541:Pontiff Greg Bard
2179:Ioannes Pragensis
2161:I have nominated
2143:Pontiff Greg Bard
1959:Pontiff Greg Bard
1927:Pontiff Greg Bard
1870:The Transhumanist
1675:The Transhumanist
1626:The Transhumanist
1609:Pontiff Greg Bard
1548:Pontiff Greg Bard
1346:Damir Ibrisimovic
1319:Pontiff Greg Bard
1245:Pontiff Greg Bard
1055:I have nominated
993:Pontiff Greg Bard
920:Pontiff Greg Bard
855:Pontiff Greg Bard
801:Pontiff Greg Bard
775:Pontiff Greg Bard
757:Pontiff Greg Bard
734:
407:
401:
238:Fundamental right
178:Damir Ibrisimovic
144:Damir Ibrisimovic
103:
102:
54:
53:
48:current talk page
5579:
5539:for the article
5508:
5475:
5280:User:Jimharlow99
5047:
5045:
5039:
4934:
4931:
4927:
4899:
4897:
4851:
4849:
4843:
4724:
4639:
4374:
4318:
4300:Thomas Jefferson
4261:
4222:
4096:Francisco Franco
3955:
3895:
3894:
3665:Dustbin category
3658:Dustbin category
3446:
2903:math and logic.
2842:Domenico Losurdo
2836:Domenico Losurdo
2751:Bernard Williams
2597:
2575:
2527:
2522:
2517:
2480:
2479:
2235:
2234:
1771:Is-ought problem
1709:Is-ought problem
1436:
1431:
1425:
1281:Social Analytics
1174:
1127:
914:article and the
725:Message sent by
724:
712:
546:Theory of Others
540:Theory of Others
524:
520:
519:
398:
393:
390:
383:
329:
284:
81:
56:
55:
33:
32:
26:
5587:
5586:
5582:
5581:
5580:
5578:
5577:
5576:
5533:
5498:, is under way
5484:
5463:
5460:toolserver tool
5302:
5208:
5165:
5043:
5037:
5035:
5010:
4975:Cyrus the Great
4963:
4929:
4921:
4893:
4863:
4847:
4841:
4839:
4788:
4761:
4689:
4658:
4631:Metamathematics
4623:
4591:Formal language
4579:
4526:
4501:
4440:
4404:
4372:
4349:
4297:
4270:
4259:
4256:
4241:
4194:
4131:
3938:
3892:
3891:
3849:
3800:WP:PRIMARYTOPIC
3727:
3712:Phatius McBluff
3700:Theory of forms
3688:
3661:
3632:
3607:
3564:Template:Ethics
3534:
3505:
3502:Albert Einstein
3466:
3417:
3353:
3222:
3218:
3214:
3211:Theory:{theorem
3020:
2999:_Theories": -->
2984:_Theories": -->
2960:
2951:_Theories": -->
2927:
2885:
2869:The gay science
2861:
2838:
2810:
2784:
2747:
2665:
2576:
2525:
2520:
2515:
2477:
2476:
2411:
2386:and a category
2380:
2303:
2279:
2232:
2231:
2209:the idea itself
2194:
2159:
2116:
2075:
2072:Carlo Tamagnone
2046:
2021:Objectification
1979:
1907:
1903:Sorites paradox
1884:
1852:
1817:
1712:
1686:
1492:
1463:
1434:
1429:
1423:
1381:
1335:
1308:
1261:
1172:
1125:
1090:
1053:
973:
900:
793:
746:
710:
668:fully-automated
656:
542:
517:
515:
457:
415:
396:
386:
372:
293:
248:
242:high importance
234:
193:
130:
128:Percept Article
108:
77:
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
5585:
5583:
5560:
5559:
5552:
5532:
5523:
5503:
5483:
5480:
5455:
5454:
5448:
5442:
5436:
5430:
5423:
5422:
5416:
5410:
5404:
5397:
5396:
5390:
5383:
5382:
5376:
5370:
5364:
5357:
5356:
5350:
5344:
5338:
5332:
5326:
5319:
5318:
5301:
5300:Pageview stats
5298:
5297:
5296:
5295:
5294:
5274:
5273:
5260:
5256:
5255:
5251:
5250:
5207:
5204:
5203:
5202:
5164:
5159:
5158:
5157:
5156:
5155:
5154:
5153:
5152:
5151:
5150:
5149:
5126:
5125:
5124:
5123:
5122:
5121:
5120:
5119:
5098:
5097:
5096:
5095:
5094:
5093:
5080:
5072:
5071:
5070:
5069:
5052:
5051:
5009:
5006:
4971:Cyrus cylinder
4962:
4956:
4955:
4954:
4953:
4952:
4938:
4862:
4859:
4858:
4857:
4856:
4855:
4833:
4832:
4817:
4816:
4811:
4810:
4787:
4782:
4760:
4757:
4756:
4755:
4739:
4738:
4719:
4688:
4685:
4668:being held at
4657:
4654:
4627:Talk:Metalogic
4622:
4619:
4593:, the article
4578:
4573:
4572:
4571:
4525:
4522:
4500:
4497:
4482:
4481:
4451:
4450:
4439:
4436:
4403:
4397:
4396:
4395:
4394:
4393:
4348:
4345:
4296:
4293:
4269:
4266:
4258:
4240:
4237:
4193:
4190:
4189:
4188:
4187:
4186:
4130:
4127:
4126:
4125:
4124:
4123:
4044:
4043:
4042:
4041:
4040:
4039:
4038:
4037:
4011:
4010:
4009:
4008:
4007:
4006:
3974:
3973:
3929:
3928:
3927:
3926:
3848:
3845:
3810:
3809:
3803:
3797:
3791:
3785:
3778:
3764:
3763:
3760:
3749:
3742:
3726:
3723:
3687:
3680:
3660:
3655:
3631:
3626:
3606:
3601:
3587:
3586:
3581:
3576:
3571:
3566:
3560:
3559:
3554:
3549:
3544:
3533:
3530:
3504:
3499:
3465:
3462:
3461:
3460:
3416:
3410:
3408:
3352:
3347:
3331:
3330:
3329:
3328:
3327:
3326:
3325:
3324:
3299:
3298:
3297:
3296:
3295:
3294:
3293:
3292:
3268:
3267:
3266:
3265:
3264:
3263:
3262:
3261:
3251:
3250:
3249:
3248:
3247:
3246:
3245:
3244:
3243:
3242:
3237:
3234:
3231:
3228:
3225:
3220:
3219:, ..., theorem
3216:
3212:
3192:
3191:
3190:
3189:
3188:
3187:
3171:
3170:
3169:
3168:
3167:
3166:
3157:
3156:
3155:
3154:
3153:
3152:
3144:
3143:
3142:
3141:
3140:
3139:
3127:
3126:
3125:
3124:
3123:
3122:
3113:
3112:
3111:
3110:
3109:
3108:
3100:
3099:
3098:
3097:
3096:
3095:
3087:
3086:
3085:
3084:
3019:
3016:
3015:
3014:
2959:
2955:
2926:
2922:
2884:
2880:
2860:
2857:
2837:
2834:
2809:
2803:
2783:
2780:
2746:
2743:
2742:
2741:
2740:
2739:
2695:
2694:
2686:
2685:
2677:
2676:
2664:
2661:
2660:
2659:
2658:
2657:
2656:
2655:
2654:
2653:
2643:75.154.186.241
2627:
2626:
2625:
2624:
2623:
2622:
2621:
2620:
2619:
2618:
2617:
2616:
2556:
2555:
2554:
2553:
2552:
2551:
2533:
2532:
2531:
2530:
2529:
2528:
2523:
2518:
2508:
2507:
2502:
2501:
2500:
2499:
2452:
2451:
2445:
2440:
2435:
2430:
2425:
2410:
2407:
2379:
2376:
2344:GA sweeps page
2302:
2299:
2278:
2272:
2271:
2270:
2269:
2268:
2240:
2193:
2190:
2158:
2155:
2154:
2153:
2115:
2112:
2074:
2069:
2050:Talk:Aristotle
2045:
2039:
2038:
2037:
2036:
2035:
1978:
1975:
1974:
1973:
1972:
1971:
1970:
1969:
1906:
1900:
1883:
1877:
1851:
1848:
1816:
1811:
1810:
1809:
1808:
1807:
1786:
1785:
1766:
1765:
1711:
1706:
1685:
1682:
1658:
1657:
1637:
1636:
1621:
1601:
1600:
1599:
1598:
1597:
1596:
1491:
1488:
1487:
1486:
1485:
1484:
1462:
1459:
1458:
1457:
1456:
1455:
1380:
1377:
1376:
1375:
1344:Kind regards,
1334:
1331:
1330:
1329:
1307:
1304:
1265:User:Thlgnosis
1260:
1257:
1256:
1255:
1239:
1238:
1233:
1232:
1227:
1226:
1221:
1220:
1219:
1218:
1217:
1216:
1215:
1214:
1185:
1184:the talk page.
1181:
1180:
1179:
1099:
1093:
1089:
1086:
1057:Muhammad Iqbal
1052:
1049:
1048:
1047:
1021:
972:
969:
968:
967:
949:
948:
899:
896:
879:
878:
870:
869:
851:
850:
849:
848:
826:
825:
817:
816:
792:
789:
788:
787:
786:
785:
771:Article alerts
742:
695:Article Alerts
662:Article alerts
655:
653:Article alerts
650:
649:
648:
647:
646:
645:
644:
621:
620:
619:
618:
601:
600:
541:
538:
537:
536:
494:Rene Descartes
486:Thomas Aquinas
456:
450:
414:
409:
384:Delievered by
371:
368:
285:(also current
233:
230:
192:
189:
176:Kind regards,
155:
142:Kind regards,
129:
126:
107:
104:
101:
100:
95:
92:
87:
82:
75:
70:
65:
62:
52:
51:
34:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
5584:
5575:
5574:
5570:
5566:
5557:
5553:
5550:
5546:
5545:
5544:
5542:
5538:
5531:
5527:
5524:
5522:
5521:
5516:
5512:
5507:
5501:
5497:
5493:
5489:
5481:
5479:
5478:
5474:
5473:
5471:
5466:
5461:
5452:
5449:
5446:
5443:
5440:
5437:
5434:
5431:
5428:
5425:
5424:
5420:
5417:
5414:
5411:
5408:
5405:
5402:
5399:
5398:
5394:
5391:
5388:
5385:
5384:
5380:
5377:
5374:
5371:
5368:
5365:
5362:
5359:
5358:
5354:
5351:
5348:
5345:
5342:
5339:
5336:
5333:
5330:
5327:
5324:
5321:
5320:
5316:
5315:
5311:
5310:
5309:
5307:
5299:
5293:
5289:
5285:
5281:
5278:
5277:
5276:
5275:
5272:
5268:
5264:
5261:
5258:
5257:
5253:
5252:
5247:
5246:
5245:
5244:
5240:
5236:
5231:
5229:
5228:philosophical
5224:
5221:
5220:philosophical
5217:
5213:
5205:
5201:
5197:
5193:
5188:
5187:
5186:
5185:
5181:
5177:
5173:
5170:
5169:91.104.205.67
5163:
5160:
5148:
5144:
5140:
5136:
5135:
5134:
5133:
5132:
5131:
5130:
5129:
5128:
5127:
5118:
5114:
5110:
5106:
5105:
5104:
5103:
5102:
5101:
5100:
5099:
5092:
5088:
5084:
5081:
5078:
5077:
5076:
5075:
5074:
5073:
5068:
5064:
5060:
5056:
5055:
5054:
5053:
5050:
5046:
5040:
5033:
5029:
5028:
5027:
5026:
5022:
5018:
5014:
5008:Popular pages
5007:
5005:
5004:
5000:
4996:
4992:
4988:
4984:
4981:
4976:
4972:
4968:
4961:
4957:
4951:
4947:
4943:
4939:
4937:
4932:
4926:
4925:
4919:
4918:fait accompli
4914:
4910:
4905:
4904:
4903:
4898:
4896:
4889:
4888:
4887:
4886:
4882:
4878:
4874:
4868:
4867:
4860:
4854:
4850:
4844:
4837:
4836:
4835:
4834:
4831:
4827:
4823:
4819:
4818:
4813:
4812:
4808:
4807:
4806:
4805:
4801:
4797:
4793:
4786:
4783:
4781:
4780:
4777:
4774:
4770:
4766:
4758:
4754:
4750:
4746:
4741:
4740:
4737:
4732:
4728:
4723:
4720:
4717:
4713:
4709:
4708:
4707:
4706:
4702:
4698:
4694:
4691:I don't like
4686:
4684:
4683:
4679:
4675:
4671:
4667:
4663:
4655:
4653:
4652:
4647:
4643:
4638:
4634:
4632:
4628:
4620:
4618:
4617:
4613:
4609:
4603:
4599:
4596:
4592:
4587:
4586:
4585:
4577:
4574:
4570:
4566:
4562:
4558:
4553:
4549:
4545:
4544:
4543:
4542:
4538:
4534:
4530:
4523:
4521:
4520:
4516:
4512:
4511:
4507:. Thank you,
4506:
4498:
4496:
4495:
4491:
4487:
4486:Michael Hardy
4480:
4479:
4478:
4476:
4473:, placing an
4472:
4468:
4464:
4460:
4456:
4449:
4448:
4447:
4445:
4437:
4435:
4434:
4430:
4426:
4422:
4418:
4413:
4409:
4402:
4398:
4392:
4388:
4384:
4380:
4379:
4378:
4375:
4369:
4368:
4367:
4366:
4362:
4358:
4357:Granitethighs
4354:
4346:
4344:
4343:
4338:
4334:
4330:
4326:
4322:
4317:
4313:
4309:
4305:
4301:
4294:
4292:
4291:
4287:
4283:
4279:
4275:
4267:
4265:
4264:
4260:
4254:
4250:
4249:Living Ethics
4246:
4238:
4236:
4235:
4230:
4226:
4221:
4217:
4215:
4210:
4207:
4203:
4202:heterological
4199:
4191:
4185:
4181:
4177:
4173:
4172:
4171:
4167:
4163:
4159:
4155:
4154:
4153:
4152:
4148:
4144:
4140:
4136:
4128:
4122:
4118:
4114:
4109:
4105:
4101:
4097:
4092:
4088:
4087:
4086:
4082:
4078:
4073:
4072:
4071:
4070:
4066:
4062:
4057:
4053:
4049:
4036:
4032:
4028:
4023:
4019:
4018:
4017:
4016:
4015:
4014:
4013:
4012:
4005:
4001:
3997:
3993:
3992:
3991:
3987:
3983:
3978:
3977:
3976:
3975:
3972:
3968:
3964:
3959:
3958:
3957:
3956:
3954:
3950:
3946:
3945:85.250.178.76
3942:
3936:
3935:
3925:
3921:
3917:
3913:
3909:
3905:
3901:
3900:
3899:
3896:
3888:
3887:battlegrounds
3884:
3879:
3878:
3877:
3876:
3872:
3868:
3863:
3859:
3854:
3846:
3844:
3843:
3839:
3835:
3830:
3828:
3824:
3820:
3814:
3807:
3804:
3801:
3798:
3795:
3792:
3789:
3786:
3783:
3782:WP:DICTIONARY
3779:
3776:
3775:WP:DICTIONARY
3773:
3772:
3771:
3768:
3761:
3758:
3754:
3750:
3747:
3743:
3740:
3739:
3738:
3736:
3732:
3724:
3722:
3721:
3717:
3713:
3709:
3706:
3701:
3697:
3693:
3685:
3682:Proposal for
3681:
3679:
3678:
3674:
3670:
3666:
3659:
3656:
3654:
3653:
3649:
3645:
3641:
3637:
3630:
3627:
3625:
3624:
3620:
3616:
3612:
3605:
3602:
3600:
3599:
3595:
3591:
3585:
3582:
3580:
3577:
3575:
3572:
3570:
3567:
3565:
3562:
3561:
3558:
3555:
3553:
3552:Portal:Ethics
3550:
3548:
3545:
3543:
3540:
3539:
3538:
3531:
3529:
3528:
3524:
3521:
3518:
3514:
3510:
3503:
3500:
3498:
3497:
3493:
3489:
3488:
3483:
3479:
3475:
3471:
3463:
3459:
3454:
3450:
3444:
3443:
3442:
3440:
3436:
3432:
3429:
3426:
3422:
3415:
3411:
3409:
3406:
3405:
3401:
3397:
3392:
3388:
3386:
3382:
3378:
3374:
3369:
3367:
3363:
3362:Modus tollens
3359:
3351:
3348:
3346:
3345:
3341:
3337:
3323:
3319:
3315:
3312:
3307:
3306:
3305:
3304:
3303:
3302:
3301:
3300:
3290:
3286:
3281:
3276:
3275:
3274:
3273:
3272:
3271:
3270:
3269:
3259:
3258:
3257:
3256:
3255:
3254:
3253:
3252:
3241:
3238:
3235:
3232:
3229:
3226:
3224:
3209:
3208:
3205:
3204:Category:Isms
3200:
3199:
3198:
3197:
3196:
3195:
3194:
3193:
3186:
3183:
3182:
3177:
3176:
3175:
3174:
3173:
3172:
3163:
3162:
3161:
3160:
3159:
3158:
3150:
3149:
3148:
3147:
3146:
3145:
3137:
3133:
3132:
3131:
3130:
3129:
3128:
3119:
3118:
3117:
3116:
3115:
3114:
3106:
3105:
3104:
3103:
3102:
3101:
3093:
3092:
3091:
3090:
3089:
3088:
3083:
3079:
3075:
3071:
3067:
3066:
3065:
3062:
3061:
3056:
3055:
3054:
3053:
3049:
3045:
3041:
3036:
3032:
3029:
3024:
3017:
3013:
3010:
3009:
3004:
3003:
3002:
3001:
2996:
2992:
2987:
2986:
2981:
2977:
2973:
2969:
2965:
2956:
2954:
2953:
2948:
2944:
2940:
2936:
2932:
2923:
2921:
2920:
2915:
2911:
2907:
2906:
2902:
2898:
2894:
2890:
2881:
2879:
2878:
2874:
2870:
2864:
2858:
2856:
2855:
2851:
2847:
2843:
2835:
2833:
2832:
2828:
2824:
2820:
2815:
2808:
2804:
2802:
2801:
2797:
2793:
2790:. Thank you!
2789:
2781:
2779:
2778:
2774:
2770:
2769:
2764:
2760:
2756:
2752:
2744:
2738:
2734:
2730:
2725:
2724:
2723:
2719:
2715:
2710:
2709:
2708:
2707:
2703:
2699:
2693:
2688:
2687:
2684:
2679:
2678:
2675:
2670:
2669:
2668:
2662:
2652:
2648:
2644:
2640:
2635:
2634:
2633:
2632:
2631:
2630:
2629:
2628:
2615:
2611:
2607:
2602:
2601:
2600:
2599:
2596:
2592:
2588:
2584:
2580:
2573:
2571:
2569:
2567:
2564:
2563:
2562:
2561:
2560:
2559:
2558:
2557:
2550:
2546:
2542:
2539:
2538:
2537:
2536:
2535:
2534:
2524:
2519:
2514:
2513:
2512:
2511:
2510:
2509:
2504:
2503:
2498:
2494:
2490:
2486:
2485:
2484:
2481:
2472:
2471:
2470:
2469:
2465:
2461:
2457:
2450:
2446:
2444:
2441:
2439:
2436:
2434:
2431:
2429:
2426:
2423:
2419:
2416:
2415:
2414:
2408:
2406:
2405:
2401:
2397:
2393:
2389:
2385:
2377:
2375:
2374:
2370:
2366:
2362:
2358:
2353:
2349:
2345:
2340:
2336:
2334:
2333:
2328:
2327:
2326:running total
2322:
2318:
2317:
2312:
2308:
2300:
2298:
2297:
2293:
2289:
2285:
2276:
2273:
2267:
2263:
2259:
2255:
2254:
2253:
2249:
2245:
2241:
2239:
2236:
2228:
2225:
2224:
2223:
2222:
2218:
2214:
2210:
2206:
2201:
2199:
2191:
2189:
2188:
2184:
2180:
2176:
2172:
2168:
2164:
2156:
2152:
2148:
2144:
2140:
2136:
2135:
2134:
2133:
2129:
2125:
2121:
2113:
2111:
2110:
2106:
2102:
2098:
2093:
2089:
2085:
2081:
2073:
2070:
2068:
2067:
2063:
2059:
2055:
2051:
2044:
2040:
2034:
2030:
2026:
2022:
2019:Furthermore,
2018:
2017:
2016:
2012:
2008:
2004:
2000:
1999:
1998:
1997:
1993:
1989:
1984:
1976:
1968:
1964:
1960:
1956:
1952:
1951:
1950:
1946:
1942:
1938:
1937:
1936:
1932:
1928:
1923:
1922:
1921:
1920:
1916:
1912:
1904:
1901:
1899:
1898:
1894:
1890:
1882:
1878:
1876:
1875:
1872:
1871:
1866:
1863:
1861:
1857:
1849:
1847:
1846:
1842:
1838:
1834:
1830:
1826:
1822:
1815:
1812:
1806:
1802:
1798:
1794:
1790:
1789:
1788:
1787:
1784:
1780:
1776:
1772:
1768:
1767:
1764:
1760:
1756:
1751:
1750:
1749:
1748:
1744:
1740:
1734:
1733:
1729:
1725:
1721:
1717:
1710:
1707:
1705:
1704:
1700:
1696:
1692:
1683:
1681:
1680:
1677:
1676:
1671:
1667:
1666:verifiability
1663:
1656:
1652:
1648:
1643:
1642:
1641:
1634:
1633:
1632:
1631:
1628:
1627:
1619:
1618:
1614:
1610:
1606:
1594:
1590:
1589:
1588:
1584:
1580:
1575:
1571:
1570:Philosophical
1567:
1563:
1562:Philosophical
1559:
1558:
1557:
1553:
1549:
1545:
1541:
1537:
1532:
1531:
1530:
1529:
1525:
1521:
1515:
1513:
1512:
1507:
1506:
1501:
1497:
1489:
1483:
1479:
1475:
1471:
1467:
1466:
1465:
1464:
1460:
1454:
1450:
1446:
1442:
1441:
1440:
1437:
1428:
1421:
1417:
1416:
1415:
1414:
1410:
1406:
1402:
1399:. I propose
1398:
1394:
1390:
1386:
1378:
1374:
1370:
1366:
1362:
1358:
1357:
1356:
1355:
1351:
1347:
1342:
1338:
1332:
1328:
1324:
1320:
1317:
1313:
1312:Category:Vice
1310:
1309:
1306:Category:Vice
1305:
1303:
1302:
1298:
1294:
1293:193.244.33.47
1291:. Thank you!
1290:
1286:
1282:
1278:
1274:
1270:
1266:
1258:
1254:
1250:
1246:
1241:
1240:
1235:
1234:
1229:
1228:
1223:
1222:
1213:
1209:
1205:
1200:
1199:
1198:
1194:
1190:
1186:
1182:
1178:
1175:
1169:
1165:
1164:
1163:
1159:
1155:
1151:
1148:
1147:
1146:
1142:
1138:
1133:
1132:
1131:
1128:
1122:
1118:
1114:
1113:
1112:
1111:
1107:
1103:
1097:
1087:
1085:
1084:
1080:
1076:
1075:
1070:
1066:
1062:
1058:
1050:
1046:
1042:
1038:
1034:
1030:
1025:
1022:
1020:
1016:
1012:
1008:
1005:
1004:
1003:
1002:
998:
994:
990:
986:
982:
978:
970:
966:
962:
958:
954:
951:
950:
947:
943:
939:
935:
932:
931:
930:
929:
925:
921:
917:
913:
909:
905:
897:
895:
894:
890:
886:
877:
873:
872:
867:
866:
865:
864:
860:
856:
845:
844:
843:
842:
841:
840:
836:
832:
824:
820:
819:
813:
812:
811:
810:
806:
802:
798:
791:Two proposals
790:
784:
780:
776:
772:
768:
767:
766:
762:
758:
754:
753:
752:
750:
745:
740:
735:
732:
728:
722:
720:
716:
708:
707:"news system"
704:
700:
696:
691:
689:
685:
681:
677:
673:
669:
665:
664:
663:
654:
651:
643:
639:
635:
631:
627:
626:
625:
624:
623:
622:
617:
613:
609:
605:
604:
603:
602:
599:
595:
591:
587:
582:
578:
574:
570:
569:
568:
567:
563:
559:
555:
551:
547:
539:
535:
531:
527:
523:
514:
513:
512:
511:
507:
503:
499:
495:
491:
487:
483:
482:Immanuel Kant
479:
475:
470:
469:Kosuke Koyama
466:
462:
455:
454:Kosuke Koyama
451:
449:
448:
444:
440:
434:
433:
429:
425:
420:
413:
410:
408:
406:
402:
399:
391:
389:
379:
377:
367:
366:
362:
358:
354:
350:
346:
342:
338:
334:
327:
324:
321:
318:
315:
312:
309:
306:
303:
300:
297:
292:
288:
282:
279:
276:
273:
270:
267:
264:
261:
258:
255:
252:
247:
243:
239:
231:
229:
228:
224:
220:
216:
212:
208:
205:
202:
198:
190:
188:
187:
183:
179:
174:
170:
166:
162:
158:
154:
153:
149:
145:
140:
137:
133:
127:
125:
124:
120:
116:
112:
105:
99:
96:
93:
91:
88:
86:
83:
80:
76:
74:
71:
69:
66:
63:
61:
58:
57:
49:
45:
41:
40:
35:
28:
27:
19:
5561:
5534:
5506:DavidĀ Wilson
5485:
5469:
5468:
5456:
5312:
5303:
5232:
5227:
5225:
5219:
5216:22 September
5209:
5176:Pollinosisss
5166:
5139:Pollinosisss
5083:Pollinosisss
5011:
4991:Human rights
4967:Human rights
4964:
4960:Human rights
4923:
4917:
4894:
4869:
4864:
4822:Pollinosisss
4789:
4762:
4722:CRGreathouse
4697:Pollinosisss
4690:
4659:
4637:CRGreathouse
4635:
4624:
4604:
4600:
4588:
4581:
4580:
4561:Singinglemon
4552:Aristotelian
4548:Aristotelian
4533:Pollinosisss
4527:
4508:
4502:
4499:Relevant AfD
4483:
4474:
4470:
4466:
4462:
4458:
4454:
4452:
4441:
4425:UncleDouggie
4405:
4353:Nomenclature
4350:
4316:TonyTheTiger
4298:
4271:
4257:
4242:
4220:CRGreathouse
4218:
4211:
4196:The article
4195:
4132:
4108:Brian Morton
4077:CarolMooreDC
4045:
4027:CarolMooreDC
3937:
3933:
3932:
3930:
3862:quid pro quo
3852:
3850:
3831:
3815:
3811:
3769:
3765:
3728:
3704:
3696:my user page
3692:Hylomorphism
3689:
3684:Hylomorphism
3662:
3633:
3608:
3588:
3535:
3519:
3506:
3485:
3467:
3427:
3418:
3407:
3393:
3389:
3384:
3380:
3379:, who gives
3372:
3370:
3358:Modus ponens
3354:
3332:
3288:
3279:
3239:
3210:
3180:
3059:
3037:
3033:
3027:
3025:
3021:
3007:
2988:
2961:
2928:
2908:
2900:
2886:
2865:
2862:
2839:
2811:
2785:
2766:
2748:
2696:
2666:
2453:
2412:
2381:
2341:
2337:
2332:new worklist
2330:
2324:
2314:
2304:
2280:
2258:WhatamIdoing
2213:WhatamIdoing
2208:
2202:
2195:
2160:
2117:
2096:
2091:
2087:
2083:
2079:
2076:
2047:
2003:Subjectivity
1980:
1908:
1885:
1869:
1867:
1864:
1853:
1818:
1735:
1713:
1687:
1674:
1659:
1638:
1625:
1620:
1602:
1592:
1573:
1569:
1565:
1561:
1516:
1509:
1503:
1502:that end in
1493:
1400:
1382:
1343:
1339:
1336:
1262:
1091:
1072:
1054:
1032:
1023:
1006:
974:
952:
933:
901:
881:
874:
852:
828:
821:
794:
736:
723:
714:
711:display=none
694:
692:
660:
659:
657:
543:
521:
463:rather than
458:
435:
416:
392:
387:
380:
373:
322:
316:
310:
304:
298:
277:
271:
265:
259:
253:
246:Hauskalainen
236:The article
235:
203:
194:
175:
171:
167:
163:
159:
156:
141:
138:
134:
131:
109:
78:
43:
37:
5263:Jimharlow99
5162:Misanthropy
4765:Georg Hegel
4759:Georg Hegel
4503:Please see
3939:āPreceding
3858:indifferent
3615:Jezhotwells
3509:peer review
3412:Rewrite of
3280:more easily
2577:āPreceding
2456:my talkpage
2361:Nehrams2020
2357:OhanaUnited
2321:GA criteria
2288:John Carter
2092:suppression
1983:Objectivity
1957:. Welcome.
1860:eudaimonism
1518:Legalism --
1237:unassessed.
1123:. Regards,
876:nomination.
823:nomination.
727:User:Addbot
715:give a link
699:report bugs
680:Peer review
502:ACEOREVIVED
36:This is an
5059:Paradoctor
5044:barbarian
4909:WP:OUTLINE
4848:barbarian
4796:Smallbones
4373:Skomorokh
4333:WP:CHICAGO
4200:is, well,
4198:Perfection
4192:Perfection
4162:Sanitycult
3996:Sanitycult
3963:Sanitycult
3908:controlled
3893:Skomorokh
3883:controlled
3827:WP:DISRUPT
3746:humanities
3669:Sam Weller
3613:. Thanks.
2583:Paradoctor
2489:Paradoctor
2478:Skomorokh
2396:Hans Adler
2233:Skomorokh
2058:Dougweller
1941:Paradoctor
1911:Paradoctor
1856:eudaimonia
1793:Philosophy
1720:Philosophy
1695:Lightmouse
1693:. Regards
1662:notability
1605:Discussion
1500:philosophy
1461:Categories
1337:Dear all,
912:Philosophy
749:WP Physics
737:Thanks. ā
581:notability
498:David Hume
490:John Locke
465:philosophy
320:pageĀ moves
275:pageĀ moves
157:Dear all,
132:Dear all,
98:ArchiveĀ 15
90:ArchiveĀ 12
85:ArchiveĀ 11
79:ArchiveĀ 10
5190:article)?
5038:Skomorokh
4983:occasions
4842:Skomorokh
4245:Agni Yoga
4113:Edhubbard
4104:Free will
4100:Free will
4061:Edhubbard
3934:Bold text
3788:WP:VERIFY
3705:rename it
3604:Either/Or
3507:...is at
3215:, theorem
3018:Rationale
2846:DThomsen8
2683:Criticism
2316:GA sweeps
2043:Aristotle
2025:Fixer1234
2007:Fixer1234
2005:as well?
1988:Fixer1234
1833:talk page
1435:Skomorokh
1173:Skomorokh
1126:Skomorokh
1121:WP:ASSESS
1027:that the
938:Husserl08
918:as well.
684:full list
608:Ducio1234
586:WP:SPEEDY
558:Ducio1234
554:Ducio1234
474:Knowledge
439:Husserl08
419:Amoralism
412:Amoralism
326:blockĀ log
281:blockĀ log
73:ArchiveĀ 9
68:ArchiveĀ 8
60:ArchiveĀ 5
5017:Ysangkok
4980:previous
4815:project.
4773:goethean
4745:Arash Eb
4383:Ostracon
4206:WP:SYNTH
4176:Looie496
4025:Thanks.
3982:Looie496
3941:unsigned
3832:Thanks!
3794:WP:UNDUE
3780:Also at
3757:humanism
3731:humanism
3686:overhaul
3523:contribs
3513:Casliber
3431:contribs
3202:observe:
3136:cforking
2958:Theories
2925:Theories
2792:The Ogre
2692:Concepts
2591:contribs
2579:unsigned
2460:Quiddity
2352:worklist
2124:Skysmith
2101:Laforgue
2054:Ayn Rand
1881:Republic
1837:Jwhosler
1825:Jwhosler
1577:title.--
1204:Looie496
1137:Looie496
799:please?
744:ĪŗĪæĪ½ĻĻĪ¹Ī²Ļ
739:Headbomb
461:theology
302:contribs
257:contribs
219:Looie496
207:contribs
5192:Shanata
4942:Buridan
4913:WP:LIST
4895:Snowded
4714:(where
4421:Virtual
4337:WP:LOTM
4274:WP:MATH
3759:article
3748:article
3640:Justice
3396:Pjacobi
3336:Buridan
2991:Buridan
2823:H1nkles
2714:Buridan
2689:rename
2369:contrib
2244:Buridan
2088:unknown
2080:serious
1797:Snowded
1775:Philogo
1755:Snowded
1739:Philogo
1724:Snowded
1716:intrude
1647:Philogo
1579:Philogo
1574:extinct
1520:Philogo
1474:Philogo
1445:Philogo
1427:db-move
1405:Philogo
1365:Philogo
1154:Shanata
1011:Philogo
987:and/or
957:Philogo
934:Support
885:Philogo
831:Philogo
634:Shanata
590:Shanata
526:Shanata
424:Zazaban
397:Disable
388:Ā§hepBot
291:Buridan
197:isospin
115:Philogo
39:archive
5565:Phiwum
5284:Jheald
5235:Jheald
4995:ChrisO
4924:Verbal
4471:orders
4465:, 2nd-
4461:, the
4056:WP:BLP
3916:ģ¤ė¦¬ģ¤ė¦¬ģ¤ė¦¬
3867:ģ¤ė¦¬ģ¤ė¦¬ģ¤ė¦¬
3636:Humane
3629:Humane
3472:for a
3289:should
3028:always
2753:for a
2680:merge
2671:merge
2604:links.
2198:manure
2165:for a
1889:SimonP
1668:, and
1273:WP:BLP
1269:WP:COI
1168:WP:ATF
1059:for a
1024:Oppose
1007:Oppose
953:Oppose
916:Portal
577:verify
341:WP:CON
289:) and
215:monism
5549:WP:OR
4475:order
4467:order
4459:order
4455:order
4444:order
4052:WP:RS
3710:.) --
3121:done.
2901:about
1420:WP:RM
1037:AllyD
550:Other
478:Plato
308:count
263:count
16:<
5569:talk
5528:for
5515:cont
5511:talk
5500:here
5288:talk
5267:talk
5239:talk
5196:talk
5180:talk
5143:talk
5113:talk
5087:talk
5063:talk
5032:here
5021:talk
5015:. --
4999:talk
4946:talk
4930:chat
4881:talk
4826:talk
4800:talk
4771:. ā
4749:talk
4701:talk
4678:talk
4664:and
4612:talk
4582:See
4565:talk
4537:talk
4515:talk
4510:Cirt
4490:talk
4429:talk
4387:talk
4361:talk
4312:here
4286:talk
4214:fire
4180:talk
4166:talk
4147:talk
4117:talk
4081:talk
4065:talk
4050:and
4048:WP:V
4031:talk
4000:talk
3986:talk
3967:talk
3949:talk
3920:talk
3871:talk
3838:talk
3729:The
3716:talk
3673:talk
3648:talk
3619:talk
3594:talk
3517:talk
3492:talk
3487:Cirt
3482:here
3453:talk
3425:talk
3400:talk
3360:and
3340:talk
3318:talk
3078:talk
3048:talk
2995:talk
2980:talk
2947:talk
2914:talk
2873:talk
2850:talk
2827:talk
2819:here
2796:talk
2773:talk
2768:Cirt
2763:here
2733:talk
2718:talk
2702:talk
2647:talk
2610:talk
2587:talk
2545:talk
2493:talk
2464:talk
2400:talk
2365:talk
2292:talk
2262:talk
2248:talk
2217:talk
2183:talk
2175:here
2147:talk
2128:talk
2105:talk
2062:talk
2029:talk
2011:talk
1992:talk
1963:talk
1945:talk
1931:talk
1915:talk
1893:talk
1858:and
1841:talk
1829:talk
1801:talk
1779:talk
1759:talk
1743:talk
1728:talk
1699:talk
1651:talk
1613:talk
1583:talk
1566:some
1552:talk
1524:talk
1511:-ism
1505:-ism
1478:talk
1449:talk
1409:talk
1369:talk
1350:talk
1323:talk
1297:talk
1283:and
1271:and
1249:talk
1208:talk
1193:talk
1189:FFMG
1158:talk
1141:talk
1117:here
1106:talk
1102:FFMG
1079:talk
1074:Cirt
1069:here
1041:talk
1015:talk
997:talk
961:talk
942:talk
924:talk
889:talk
859:talk
835:talk
805:talk
779:talk
761:talk
731:here
701:and
688:here
666:, a
638:talk
612:talk
594:talk
579:and
562:talk
530:talk
522:Done
506:talk
443:talk
428:talk
353:KGF0
351:. --
335:and
314:logs
296:talk
269:logs
251:talk
223:talk
201:talk
182:talk
148:talk
119:talk
5537:AfD
5526:AfD
5472:man
5465:Mr.
5249:no.
4329:bio
4314:.--
3449:CBM
3421:CBM
3375:by
2972:CFD
2970:at
2966:to
2939:CFD
2937:at
2933:to
2891:to
2526:---
2521:---
2516:---
2307:GAs
2177:.--
2097:and
1854:Do
1422:or
1387:to
496:or
287:wqa
5571:)
5513:Ā·
5486:A
5470:Z-
5290:)
5269:)
5241:)
5198:)
5182:)
5145:)
5115:)
5089:)
5065:)
5041:,
5034:.
5023:)
5001:)
4989:.
4948:)
4891:--
4883:)
4845:,
4828:)
4802:)
4751:)
4729:|
4703:)
4680:)
4672:.
4644:|
4614:)
4567:)
4559:.
4539:)
4517:)
4492:)
4431:)
4389:)
4363:)
4339:)
4288:)
4280:.
4227:|
4182:)
4168:)
4149:)
4119:)
4083:)
4067:)
4033:)
4002:)
3988:)
3969:)
3951:)
3922:)
3873:)
3840:)
3821:,
3718:)
3675:)
3650:)
3621:)
3596:)
3525:)
3494:)
3451:Ā·
3441:.
3402:)
3394:--
3368:.
3342:)
3320:)
3080:)
3050:)
2997:)
2982:)
2949:)
2916:)
2875:)
2852:)
2829:)
2798:)
2775:)
2765:.
2735:)
2720:)
2704:)
2649:)
2612:)
2593:)
2589:ā¢
2547:)
2495:)
2466:)
2422:eg
2402:)
2394:--
2371:)
2367:ā¢
2294:)
2264:)
2250:)
2229:,
2219:)
2185:)
2149:)
2141:.
2130:)
2107:)
2064:)
2031:)
2013:)
1994:)
1965:)
1947:)
1933:)
1917:)
1895:)
1843:)
1835:.
1803:)
1781:)
1773:--
1761:)
1753:--
1745:)
1730:)
1701:)
1664:,
1653:)
1615:)
1607:)
1585:)
1554:)
1542:,
1526:)
1480:)
1472:--
1451:)
1432:.
1430:}}
1424:{{
1411:)
1371:)
1363:--
1352:)
1325:)
1299:)
1279:,
1251:)
1210:)
1195:)
1170:.
1160:)
1143:)
1108:)
1081:)
1071:.
1043:)
1017:)
1009:-
999:)
991:.
963:)
955:-
944:)
926:)
891:)
861:)
837:)
829:--
807:)
781:)
763:)
747:ā
721:.
690:.
678:,
674:,
640:)
632:.
614:)
596:)
564:)
556:--
532:)
508:)
492:,
488:,
484:,
480:,
445:)
430:)
363:)
359:|
355:(
225:)
184:)
150:)
121:)
94:ā
64:ā
5567:(
5551:,
5517:)
5509:(
5504:ā
5453:.
5447:.
5441:.
5435:.
5429:.
5421:.
5415:.
5409:.
5403:.
5395:.
5389:.
5381:.
5375:.
5369:.
5363:.
5355:.
5349:.
5343:.
5337:.
5331:.
5325:.
5317:.
5286:(
5265:(
5237:(
5194:(
5178:(
5141:(
5111:(
5085:(
5061:(
5019:(
4997:(
4944:(
4879:(
4875:.
4824:(
4798:(
4776:ą„
4747:(
4733:)
4731:c
4727:t
4725:(
4699:(
4676:(
4648:)
4646:c
4642:t
4640:(
4610:(
4563:(
4535:(
4513:(
4488:(
4427:(
4385:(
4359:(
4335:/
4331:/
4327:/
4325:c
4323:/
4321:t
4319:(
4284:(
4231:)
4229:c
4225:t
4223:(
4178:(
4164:(
4145:(
4141:.
4115:(
4079:(
4063:(
4029:(
3998:(
3984:(
3965:(
3947:(
3918:(
3869:(
3836:(
3714:(
3671:(
3646:(
3617:(
3592:(
3520:Ā·
3515:(
3490:(
3484:.
3455:)
3447:(
3428:Ā·
3423:(
3398:(
3338:(
3316:(
3223:}
3221:n
3217:2
3213:1
3076:(
3046:(
2993:(
2978:(
2945:(
2912:(
2871:(
2848:(
2825:(
2794:(
2771:(
2731:(
2716:(
2700:(
2645:(
2608:(
2585:(
2543:(
2491:(
2462:(
2424:)
2420:(
2398:(
2363:(
2290:(
2260:(
2246:(
2215:(
2181:(
2145:(
2126:(
2103:(
2060:(
2027:(
2009:(
1990:(
1961:(
1943:(
1929:(
1913:(
1891:(
1839:(
1827:(
1799:(
1777:(
1757:(
1741:(
1726:(
1697:(
1649:(
1611:(
1581:(
1550:(
1522:(
1476:(
1447:(
1407:(
1367:(
1348:(
1321:(
1295:(
1247:(
1206:(
1191:(
1156:(
1139:(
1104:(
1077:(
1039:(
1013:(
995:(
959:(
940:(
922:(
887:(
857:(
833:(
803:(
777:(
759:(
741:{
733:.
636:(
610:(
592:(
560:(
528:(
504:(
441:(
426:(
400:)
394:(
361:C
357:T
328:)
323:Ā·
317:Ā·
311:Ā·
305:Ā·
299:Ā·
294:(
283:)
278:Ā·
272:Ā·
266:Ā·
260:Ā·
254:Ā·
249:(
221:(
204:Ā·
199:(
180:(
146:(
117:(
50:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.