User:Heelan Coo/Edits

This is a Wikipedia user page.
This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user in whose space this page is located may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Heelan_Coo/Edits.

ə

This user is a Grammar Nazi.

Mix

This user has been influenced by too many dialects of English to use one orthography, vocabulary and grammar consistently.

Editing Philosophy[edit]

Probably due to my background in philosophy and especially logic, my edits tend to be mostly of the following three sorts:

Grammatical: Many Wikipedia articles are grammatically inconsistent, or simply incorrect. This is no doubt an excusable result of boldness, and is simple to correct.
Semantic: A fair few Wikipedia articles, particularly controversial ones, contain vague or unclear sentences. Where this doesn't violate NPOV, I often make or suggest corrections.
Wikipedian: I try to pay close attention to the style and over-arching philosophy behind the Wikipedia project, and often my edits reflect this.

List of Edits[edit]

WikiProject Logic task list

This list should be actively updated: Discuss

Logical form is in need of attention
Proposition is in need of attention
Logical connective is in need of attention
Descriptivist theory of names needs edit particularly in first section after TOC
Logical connectives: (subproject page) integration, and consistent format
Object theory is in need of attention (and there is an outstanding merge request into Object language)

WikiProject Philosophy task list

A list of articles needing cleanup associated with this project is available. See also the tool's wiki page and the index of WikiProjects.

Optimism should have a separate page that focuses on the philosophical idea of optimism and distinguishes the philosophical view from "positive thinking" and other everyday uses of the word.
Philosophy of social science, has some okay points but requires elaboration on Wittgenstein and Winch, perhaps other linguistic critiques, whether logical positivist or postmodernist.
Exchange value needs to be redone, it shouldn't be under 'Marxist theory'- although it's an important component of Marxist theory it's also vital for all economics. That said the article's weight on Marx is also absurd.
German Idealism and the articles related to it may need to be rewritten or expanded to avoid undue weight on Arthur Schopenhauer.
Protected values first section confuses right action and values and needs a copy edit, moving and wikifying
Quality (philosophy) needs a more clear explanation.
Socratic dialogues could do with some tidying and clarification. See the talk page for one suggested change.
Problem of universals: The introductory definition is (perhaps) fixed. But, the article is poor. Check out the German version.
Teleology: the article is shallow and inconsistent.
Existentialism: the quality of this article varies wildly and is in desperate need of expert attention.
Analytic philosophy This is a very major topic, but still has several sections which are stubs, and several topics which are not covered.
Lifeworld A philosophical concept that seems to have fallen exclusively into the hands of the sociologists. Could use some attention; it's a major and complex issue in phenomenology.
Perception Needs the attention of philosophically minded Wikipedians. This is only the start of an overhaul of perception and related articles.

Substantial Edits[edit]

Locks of Love: Requirements for Donors, Requirements for Recipients

Works in Progress[edit]

Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus: Needs a lot of work; studying this right now and working on improving the article about it simultaneously.

Future Plans[edit]

I plan to soon start work on the Pacifism page. I am not sure it accurately reflects the broad scope of pacifism; I feel that it may overrepresent religious pacifism and underrepresent nonreligious pacifism. It also does a horrible job of explaining deontological and consequentialist positions.