Talk:Gestaltzerfall

Comment
Problems with this article include: — Arthur Rubin (talk) 21:34, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Arbitrary Capitalization
 * 2) No reference for the primary definition.
 * 3) Reference for the secondary definition (analysis of Kanji characters) is in Japanese, if it's there at all; the English lanaguage page has no such comment.
 * 4) No justification that the reference is published or that of someone who is an expert in the field.
 * 5) The most common use of "Gestalt Collapse" seems to be the song; if the concept has any traction, it's secondary.
 * i more or less copied it from the japanese wiki by via google translate. i couldn't find much in the way of 'disorder' in google scholar. and the "gestalt collapse" in double quotes gave only two results. the second one is has both english and japanese abstracts. http://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/110006783210/. but in the other usuage http://jfa.arch.metu.edu.tr/archive/0258-5316/2009/cilt26/sayi_2/309-323.pdf, the meaning appeared different. the usage collapse may be accidental and it may not mean anything when taken out of context. google books has more results
 * http://books.google.com.sg/books?id=PP6IMSkbYWoC&pg=PA115&dq=gestalt+collapse&hl=en&sa=X&ei=esdCT4m3EMrRrQfY67zbBw&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=gestalt%20collapse&f=false.
 * again, there is no mention of disorder, yet "collapse" seems to be used more frequently. i think you are right..it may be that the title itself should be changed but not to the extent that it warrant deletion. i think the idea of collapse in the framework of gestalt theory worth mentioning because one would ask..is it the same as Cognitive dissonance or it has the same meaning as one might find in a dictionary?
 * i am obviously no expert on the topic. i found the usage on Christian von Ehrenfels and just did a quick google search. Kzl.zawlin (talk) 22:55, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
 * on further googling...the "academic term" is Gestaltzerfall. but it is narrowly restricted to viewing of kanji/chinese characters. http://www.intl.tohtech.ac.jp/images/pdf/mc.pdf. it contains a possible definition.
 * * It is the phenomenon that a viewer often becomes unable to recognize a Kanji characters after the Kanji character is viewed steadily and continuously.Kzl.zawlin (talk) 23:03, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Although Ninose and Gyoba use it specifically to apply to kanji, that is not the sole application of the term. It is clear from Ninose's articles and from other sources (e.g. Sander's Ganzheitspsychologie, 1962, not available online) that the phenomenon applies to all situations where the mind becomes overloaded by overexposure to a visual cue, and becomes unable to process it. That is, not just kanji but also geometrical shapes, faces, etc. The Japanese Wikipedia text makes this clear, by the way, and I wonder that this was not carried over. Peterravn (talk) 10:57, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Problem #6: The actual content of the article consists of 5 sentences, and nothing else. --V2Blast (talk) 02:04, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Problem #7: Paragraphs are inconsistent. The page first says it's a "is a type of visual agnosia" then proceeds to elaborate it with a sentence containing "or if they hear". Aural instances should belong to Semantic satiation instead. --Kisaragi Ayami (如月あやみ) (talk) 21:41, 13 January 2022 (UTC)