Talk:Leibniz's gap

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

Page moved. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:35, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Leibniz& → Leibniz's gap –

Per WP:CAPS ("Wikipedia avoids unnecessary capitalization") and WP:TITLE, this is a generic, common term, not a propriety or commercial term, so the article title should be downcased. Lowercase will match the formatting of related article titles. Tony  (talk)  10:13, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Support. The main principle at WP:MOSCAPS applies readily here, as do the provisions there for scientific laws and the like (the nearest specific guideline for the present case). Compare Occam's razor, Buridan's ass, Plato's beard, and other parallels. N oetica Tea? 00:09, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Formulation
The sentence starting "The problem according to Leibniz" is ill-formulated because Leibniz did not discuss modern neuroscience. It's also not clear from the preceding that Leibniz' argument concerns the wrong kind of concept, rather than the wrong kind of observation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.5.227.138 (talk) 04:18, 19 November 2019 (UTC)