Talk:Retention and protention

Philosophy: Continental / Contemporary Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Continental philosophy
	Contemporary philosophy

No copyvio[edit]

This is not copyright violation as the quotes are sourced and are not significant amount of the original text. This kind of quoting is standard in academic work.

Of course the article needs a lot more work. I was hoping a trained philosopher would do it.

Rather than delete, this page should be passed to your philosophy experts for improving

=[edit]

I was in the middle of updating when the speedy delete tag was added. I have briefly updated the article and it is a relevant topic, but it still requires work from an expert on Husserl. I removed the Varela quote, but the Merleau-Ponty quote stays because it explains Retention so beautifully and the length of the quote falls within the scope of a legitimate use of academic material.(Amerywu (talk) 07:19, 14 February 2008 (UTC))[reply]

As the reviewing admin, I agree the quote is academic fair use, but we normally do not include such full quotes; try to shorten it to the essentials. And we do expect you to do what is needed yourself to make a fuller article. Try to discuss what other philosophers have done to follow up this concept. DGG (talk) 14:02, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]