| 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. |
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Untitled
editTried to find a reasonable formulation of the "animat test" referred to in the article. I did not find any formulation concrete enough to use as the basis of an article, at least via Google. The Salon article by Dr Granger that comes up as a high match certainly refers to tha animat test, but does not describe it in any concrete form.
Beware too that the term animat is already used in several contexts, some of which are far removed from the usage suggested in this article. --Shoka 21:52, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
In fact wikipedia already has an article on animat in the sense of artificial animal, with no indication that it includes any of the features that Dr Goldstein dicusses. So the term is already ambiguous. --Shoka 21:57, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
Added a concrete-form description of the "animat test" from a Salon article I just read. And also, if the "animat" wikipage doesn't seem to refer to Goldstein's usage of the term, that doesn't seem to be a problem here, just means that the animat page could use some more updating. radimvice 07:56, 19 December 2006 (UTC)