Talk:Krista and Tatiana Hogan

This article was nominated for deletion on 20 November 2006. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles

Canada Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Psychology

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Disability

Krista and Tatiana Hogan is within the scope of WikiProject Disability. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.DisabilityWikipedia:WikiProject DisabilityTemplate:WikiProject DisabilityDisability articles

One or two?

As their brains are so highly joined, have any tests been done to say whether mentally they are one individual or two? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 13:29, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In that documentary they clearly state that they are two individuals, with different personalities. 83.251.70.81 (talk) 23:00, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No burden for such or anyx, do any is ok. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lyhendp (talk • contribs) 10:43, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Shared vision and thoughts

As I understand, there was no testing that proved that they truly share their vision input or understand each others minds, right? In documentary one of the doctors only finds out that signals to the eyes of one child can trigger an excitation in the brain image of the others'. If that is it, then why are the articles saying so much about shared thoughts as if telling about observed facts? I understand that all that is referred to as a retelling of the information that their family members gave, but in either case it seems to me possible to prove it either true or false. For instance, in case of the hypothesis of shared gustatory feelings they could've tasted the theory with giving one of the children something sweet\salty\etc. Or am I missing something or getting it wrong? DaemonDice (talk) 19:51, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Section on Shared Consciousness

The section on shared consciousness presents one person's highly speculative research, published in a philosophy journal and not based on any primary observation of the twins. This article is also the only citation for this section. This is an extraordinarily low-quality source for the tone in this section. I propose that the section be rewritten in one of three ways: 1) Add more better sources and rewrite to reflect the information in those sources. 2) Add more context. A more appropriate first sentence might start with: "An article published in a peer-reviewed philosophy journal argues on the basis of publicly available reporting, that [...].", etc. 3) Delete this section. This is my preference. I don't think one (1) speculative philosophy paper qualifies this section as being encyclopedic, especially as this article is the biography of living persons. 69.173.141.86 (talk) 19:25, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I looked into the edit history and it appears that the section was significantly expanded by an anonymous contributor from Adelaide Australia, the same location as the author of the one article cited. I am therefore going replace the self-promotion edit with the original text.

69.173.141.86 (talk) 19:46, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there- I am the author of the Synthese paper. The article was already being cited before I came across it, so I added some explanatory context. Your dismissal of peer reviewed philosophy in a prominent journal as speculative is prejudiced. I have added some citations. 2403:5818:559B:0:F10C:1CE:9A5:4D70 (talk) 02:56, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]