User talk:Joegoodbud
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Welcome!
Hello, Joegoodbud, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! -- Longhair 06:10, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Shadows of the Mind
I have noticed that you have added large chunks of text from here, under GFDL (I assume you are Philip Dorrell?). My concern is that this text has a definite point-of-view in stating facts, arguments and criticisms. Wikipedia is very clear in its policies (specifically WP:NOR and WP:RS) that theories, arguments, ideas, etc., can only be included if they can be verified to have been published from a reliable source. When it comes to academic articles like this one it is especially the case. I was hoping for your opinion on the suitability of the text you have added to the article, considering what is stated in WP:NOR. Thanks. Remy B 05:04, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
- I am still concerned that the text you added violates the WP:NOR policy on Wikipedia. I think it will have to be removed since it is sourced from a website that doesnt fall under WP:RS. I also think an article in the likes of Non-computational theory of mind (or an existing one that I am not aware of) would be a better place to place adequately sourced criticisms of the general argument Penrose makes, rather than in the article of one of his few books on the topic. By all means I want to see this topic fleshed out, but if it isnt properly sourced (ie. from a reputable publication/author) then there will be more perceived bias than perceived accuracy, and that isnt good for anyone. Remy B 11:34, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
