Talk:Creativity

English
Creativity cannot be taught 41.114.201.188 (talk) 13:19, 24 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Why Creativity cannot be taught 41.114.201.188 (talk) 13:21, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Too many individual theories
The "process theories" section is very filled out but has no context or organization for any of the theories provided. Most of them are sourced only to a few people advocating them and a few people criticizing them, and there's an enormous number of them. The section needs to get cut down a bit. Mrfoogles (talk) 17:30, 6 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Most of the article is basically pet theories, and needs to be rewritten with secondary sources to emphasize which of them are relevant, I think. Mrfoogles (talk) 16:33, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

LLM editing note
Looking at this diff from 2023, it looks like a decent portion of the article was edited with ChatGPT. This could be a non-problem, but given the originator of that diff, @Moorlock, was the largest article contributor, it should be noted. Mrfoogles (talk) 07:22, 18 July 2024 (UTC)


 * I think such tinkering is to be avoided. LLMs aren't in command of the details of sources. As such, there's no assurance at all that any paraphrasing is appropriate. OsFish (talk) 08:56, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I see a few mistakes (e.g. changing (one work type is intra-sectoral (e.g. "general sponge") -> one work type is intra-sectoral, exemplified by terms like "general sponge"), which takes an accidental use of "e.g." instead of "i.e." and changes it into a claim that the term "general sponge" is an example of a kind of work), but nothing major that I can pick out. The author says the copy-editing was "assisted" rather than done by, so that might be a good sign. I can't find any of that diff in the article now so it's unclear if any of it survived, though. Mrfoogles (talk) 19:02, 19 July 2024 (UTC)