Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Parapsychology

Everyone involved in this project, raise my right hand. --Premiumcoffee 04:17, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Your hand or my hand? brickdude^_^ 07:25, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Pages needing attention

For organization, the pages needing attention needs to be divided up into the really bad (pages needing attention), the short (stubs), and the ones that aren't that bad (others). --Premiumcoffee 05:04, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Assesments

NealParr, where can I find the page of instructions that you created on how to do assessments? --Annalisa Ventola _{(Talk | Contribs)} 20:25, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi Annalisa. You can find it on the Wikipedia:WikiProject Parapsychology/Assessment page. I added instructions there. Let me know if they aren't clear or needs work. In the table is judging criteria for the articles, but since the top tiers are by nomination only, it's basically tagging articles as stubs, starts, or B-rated articles. --Nealparr ^{(talk to me)} 01:13, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. These instructions are great. Very clear and to the point. I think I can do this now ;-) --Annalisa Ventola _{(Talk | Contribs)} 05:07, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Defining 'parapsychologist'

I just did some major pruning of Category:Parapsychologists. There were a number of psychics, psychic surgeons, and paranormal researchers inaccurately being defined as parapsychologists. However, the exercise made me think about how we define 'parapsychologist' in general, or how it should be defined for our purposes at Wikipedia. Here's my working definition for now:

a parapsychologist is a person who does (or has done) research on parapsychological topics and publishes that research in peer-reviewed journals

Thoughts? --Annalisa Ventola _{(Talk | Contribs)} 05:16, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

That's good for part of it. I'm guessing it would leave out historical figures however. If you had the same definition of "scientist" it would leave out Aristotle and Newton. ——Martin^phi _{(Talk Ψ Contribs)} 21:42, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

I think people like Harry Price should probably be in there. I don't think a category is something we can make too narrow. That's because it is supposed to be useful to the reader, but it does not define parapsychology. If a few toads get in there, it isn't going to hurt the frogs. I don't know how to narrow it down, however. ——Martin^phi _{(Talk Ψ Contribs)} —Preceding unsigned comment added by Martinphi (talk • contribs) 21:50, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

You're right. Harry Price should be in there. I'm not sure what I was thinking. --Annalisa Ventola _{(Talk | Contribs)} 22:37, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

If you just remove 'publishes research in peer-reviewed journels', it would be too broad. But as it is, it is too narrow. What to do...(sorry I'm not good with this) brickdude^_^ 07:21, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Parapsychology made FA status

Parapsychology has received Wikipedia:Featured article status. Congrats to everyone who participated! --Nealparr ^{(talk to me)} 23:09, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Reincarnation research

The Reincarnation research, which was previously a Wikipedia:Good article, lost it's good article status if anyone wants to participate in getting it back. --Nealparr ^{(talk to me)} 23:19, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm on it. brickdude^_^ 07:22, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Parapsychology FA dispute

As you might expect, there is now a dispute on the Wikipedia:Featured articles page over whether parapsychology is part of psychology or part of Religion, mysticism and mythology- in other words (in all reality), there is a dispute over whether it is to be given the status of science. Your opinions would be welcome. ——Martin^phi _{(Talk Ψ Contribs)} 21:52, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

I beleive that it is a science, and should be treated as a science, so I would figure it a subdivision of psychology. It is, after all, taught as part of that course in some colleges, and sometimes is even it's own subject. brickdude^_^ 07:24, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah. We worked it out in the end. ——Martin^phi ☎ Ψ Φ—— 08:26, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Assessment Banner Icon

I've been placing WP:PSI assessment banners on articles on the watchlist. (Don't get too excited, I didn't get very far). I noticed that our project icon on those banners looks exactly like the icon for WikiProject Psychology. Could somebody update the templates with the groovy version of the psi symbol that is found on our user boxes? I don't know how. --Annalisa Ventola _{(Talk | Contribs)} 04:22, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

The Martinphi-ScienceApologist Interview

What is the role of science in producing authoritative knowledge? How should Wikipedia report on pseudoscience? Veterans of numerous edit wars and talk page battles spanning dozens of articles across Wikipedia, User:Martinphi and User:ScienceApologist will go head to head on the subject of Wikipedia, Science, and Pseudoscience in a groundbreaking interview to be published in an upcoming issue of Signpost. User:Zvika will moderate the discussion. Post suggested topics and questions at The Martinphi-ScienceApologist Interview page. 66.30.77.62 (talk) 18:24, 10 March 2008 (UTC)