![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
[Untitled]
editThe text I have placed here is not my own. It comes from the article truth. Banno 08:39, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Rewrite
editI have been completely rewriting this article--Philogo (talk) 00:23, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
16:32, November 17, 2010 Reaarrangement plus additional material added--Philogo (talk) 11:19, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
Essay tag
editI'm not sure 'essay' is the correct tag here but what I'm trying to indicate is that the article as it is currently is full of long discursive sections that would, perhaps, be appropriate in a textbook or monograph but not (I feel) in an article-- at the least they should be trimmed and made more succinct with references given to where the argument(s) are made at length in other primary sources. Perhaps that is the rewrite currently going on? (11/2010) BrideOfKripkenstein (talk) 19:37, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
- Two Quotations added--Philogo (talk) 13:52, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
- and another thing -- I'm queasy about the 'glossary' section -- that seems not on w/r/t/ an encyclopedia article, am I wrong? BrideOfKripkenstein (talk) 19:39, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
- The glossary contents could be cast as footnotes to each occurence of the term definedPhilogo (talk) 11:17, 18 November 2010 (UTC) See attempt at this under "Notes" in the article. --Philogo (talk) 14:44, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
- Glossary replaced by notes--Philogo (talk) 17:14, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
- and another thing -- I'm queasy about the 'glossary' section -- that seems not on w/r/t/ an encyclopedia article, am I wrong? BrideOfKripkenstein (talk) 19:39, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
Cleanup
editWould someone knowledgeable in the area be able to move the tangential "This raises the issue..."-type material into a separate set of sections on "Consequences"?211.30.171.128 (talk) 13:04, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- Would you give an example of the tangential "This raises the issue..."-type material
"Just in case"
editOn behalf of the general audience, I have replaced the misleading and confusing expression "just in case", with its correct, and easily understood equivalent, "if, and only if" (also, in more technical writing, "if and only if"). The following explains the error:
Why the hyphens?
editThe title has an unneeded hyphen, as do most of the defined terms, unlike the book that they are said to be from. We should fix this. And the book uses "token sentence", not "sentence token"; their implied meanings seem rather different. Dicklyon (talk) 18:23, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
- If the article is moved, it should be moved to bearer of truth. Google Ngrams says so. Paradoctor (talk) 23:28, 4 February 2019 (UTC)