Talk:Transhuman
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Redirect
This is just a dictionary entry, and I can't see it becoming much more. I'm blanking this and redirecting to transhumanism. --Schaefer 16:14, 25 November 2004 (UTC)
- I disagree. I have demerged them and expanded the article. Loremaster 17:34, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- When searching for transhuman, I would have prefered to find the article on Transhumanism that this one. For now, I've added a see also, but I think I agree with the merger suggestion. KalevTait 16:44, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Wikipedia rule of thumb: 1) if something is in see also, try to incorporate it into main body 2) if something is in main body, it should not be in see also and therefore 3) good articles have no see also sections. --Loremaster 16:53, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- KalevTait, I disagree. Since people confuse the terms transhuman and transhumanist which are two different things, I think Transhuman and Transhumanism being seperate articles is helpful in diminishing this confusion. Also, the more thinkers are able to determine the characteristics of a transhuman the more this article has potential to be expanded. --Loremaster 17:03, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
- I've added a link to transhumanism disclaimer at the top of the page. --Loremaster 21:37, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
- I removed the link because it was not a disclaimer in legal terms, it was a redirect or a newdirect. It is not of value to this article. It is important that this article stand on its own. The transhuman came before transhumanism and FM-2030 was not interested in a social movement but an evolution of the human. Bty, Nick Bostrom did not know FM and there are far better criticism by people who actually are disagreeing with the idea of the transhuman - a human in transition to becoming posthuman, not the transhumanism vs. transhuman. Avantguarde 16:50, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- I strongly disagree with your fallacious rationale for removing the link. The article can obviously stand on its own despite the presence of this useful link (which helps people who were looking to read the article on transhumanism rather than the one on transhuman) so I've reinserted it. --Loremaster 02:32, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
