Talk:Conscience/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Ironholds (talk) 17:37, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Lede

 * Far too short. An article of this length should have around three full paragraphs. RESPONSE: Now added from each section so as not to increase article length.NimbusWeb (talk) 01:56, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * 'Commonly used metaphors for conscience include the "voice within" and the "inner light".' - these quotes need to be referenced via inline citations. RESPONSE: Citation providedNimbusWeb (talk) 01:56, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Needs to be referenced; in fact, needs to appear in the text. I can't find the bits that make up this definition anywhere.RESPONSE: related to psychology section and referenced.NimbusWeb (talk) 01:56, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Religious, secular and philosophical views about conscience

 * "Although humanity has no generally accepted definition of conscience or universal agreement about its role in ethical decision-making, three overlapping approaches address these issues:" - this needs to be referenced. RESPONSE: referencedNimbusWeb (talk) 01:56, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * 'The Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius wrote in his Meditations that conscience was the human capacity to live by rational principles that were congruent with the true, tranquil and harmonious nature of our mind and thereby that of the Universe itself: "To move from one unselfish action to another with God in mind. Only there, delight and stillness...the only rewards of our existence here are an unstained character and unselfish acts."' - how is this a religious view? RESPONSE: "God in mind"= belief in supranatural entity, this plus associated recommendations about self selfish acts constitute code of practise associated with theological belief.NimbusWeb (talk) 01:56, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * There's absolutely nothing on Judaism. RESPONSE: now addedNimbusWeb (talk) 01:56, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Two lines is not really long enough for one of the world's major religions; in addition, "Many prominent religious works about conscience also have a significant philosophical component: examples are the works of John Henry Newman, Al-Ghazali, Avicenna, Aquinas, Joseph Butler and Dietrich Bonhoeffer." - needs to be referenced Ironholds (talk) 02:12, 6 February 2010 (UTC) Is this really necessary given that fully referenced sections to all these philosophers appear later. Citations here would only repeat what appears later.NimbusWeb (talk) 09:21, 6 February 2010 (UTC) More info and refs on Judaism, but this section is merely intended to give pertinent examples of interscetions between conscience and the various religions not go into too much detail on each.NimbusWeb (talk) 09:42, 6 February 2010 (UTC) Inline citations now addedNimbusWeb (talk) 10:00, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Conscientious acts and the law

 * Seems fine.

World conscience

 * The first paragraph; is that all from the one source?

Notable examples of modern acts based on conscience

 * Fine.

Conscience in literature, art, film and music

 * "Winners of the award have included: musician Peter Gabriel (2008), Nelson Mandela (2006), the Irish rock band U2 (2005), Mary Robinson and Hilda Morales Trujillo (a Guatemalan women's rights activist) (2004) and the author and public intellectual Václav Havel (2003)." - unreferenced.

Misc

 * The article is, at 134k, a bit too long. Is there any way it could be split up? Ironholds (talk) 17:38, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
 * once the readable prose is calculated by wikipedia criteria (as was done independently by the editor Quibik (see article discussion page)) the size is 75kb. The case for it being long is set out on the discussion page and relate to its being an entry point for at least four major projects and also having a necessary coherence between religion, philosophy, law, literature and practical exampleNimbusWeb (talk) 00:58, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Lede

 * Far too short. An article of this length should have around three full paragraphs. RESPONSE: Now added from each section so as not to increase article length.NimbusWeb (talk) 01:56, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * 'Commonly used metaphors for conscience include the "voice within" and the "inner light".' - these quotes need to be referenced via inline citations. RESPONSE: Citation providedNimbusWeb (talk) 01:56, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Needs to be referenced; in fact, needs to appear in the text. I can't find the bits that make up this definition anywhere.RESPONSE: related to psychology section and referenced.NimbusWeb (talk) 01:56, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * There's now an additional problem - if you're going to reference the whole thing "Conscience, as is detailed in sections below, is a major concept in national and international law, is increasingly conceived of as applying to the world as a whole, has motivated numerous notable acts for the public good and been the subject of many prominent examples of literature, music and film." needs to be inlined. Great and speedy work regardless, though. Ironholds (talk) 02:10, 6 February 2010 (UTC) Inline citations providedNimbusWeb (talk) 09:20, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Religious, secular and philosophical views about conscience

 * "Although humanity has no generally accepted definition of conscience or universal agreement about its role in ethical decision-making, three overlapping approaches address these issues:" - this needs to be referenced. RESPONSE: referencedNimbusWeb (talk) 01:56, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * 'The Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius wrote in his Meditations that conscience was the human capacity to live by rational principles that were congruent with the true, tranquil and harmonious nature of our mind and thereby that of the Universe itself: "To move from one unselfish action to another with God in mind. Only there, delight and stillness...the only rewards of our existence here are an unstained character and unselfish acts."' - how is this a religious view? RESPONSE: "God in mind"= belief in supranatural entity, this plus associated recommendations about selfless acts constitute code of practise associated with theological belief, so religious on accepted criteria.NimbusWeb (talk) 01:56, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * There's absolutely nothing on Judaism. RESPONSE: now addedNimbusWeb (talk) 01:56, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

World conscience
RESPONSE: yes. this is accurate description of key ideas from citation, not synthesis and not OR.NimbusWeb (talk) 02:05, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * The first paragraph; is that all from the one source?

Conscience in literature, art, film and music
RESPONSE: reference now provided.NimbusWeb (talk) 02:05, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * "Winners of the award have included: musician Peter Gabriel (2008), Nelson Mandela (2006), the Irish rock band U2 (2005), Mary Robinson and Hilda Morales Trujillo (a Guatemalan women's rights activist) (2004) and the author and public intellectual Václav Havel (2003)." - unreferenced.

Misc
RESPONSE: once the readable prose is calculated by wikipedia criteria (as was done independently by the editor Quibik (see article discussion page)) the size is 75kb. The case for it being long is set out on the discussion page and relate to its being an entry point for at least four major projects and also having a necessary coherence between religion, philosophy, law, literature and practical example. As the guidelines point out "Sometimes an article simply needs to be big to give the subject adequate coverage." This article summarizes major fields in philosophy, religion and human rights. The strengths of this article are its consistent readable style and the way sections add to each other. With conscience for example it is important that philosophic and religious theory be read alongside practical examples-take either away and the whole point of conscience is lost. In accordance with the guidelines, the article is well written, created with a sensible structure and style, and is an appropriate length for the topic. It creates a broad canvas on how conscience is and has been relevant to humanity. This makes it a unique article, much better than anything on the same subject in any other encyclopaedia.NimbusWeb (talk) 02:05, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * The article is, at 134k, a bit too long. Is there any way it could be split up? Ironholds (talk) 17:38, 5 February 2010 (UTC)