Talk:Neurophenomenology

Needs sources
This article has a lot of text that looks like original research -- it badly needs attribution to sources. Also the external links are bad -- two of them are nonfunctional, and neurophenomenology.com looks like a personal web page, which is a no-no. I feel that this is a valid topic for a Wikipedia article, but it really needs to be validated better. Looie496 (talk) 22:54, 20 October 2008 (UTC)


 * The issues with original research/synthesis are still present, with a lot of assertions in wiki voice. I've tagged the last sentence for improper synthesis, but I believe there is a lot more content that represents the editor's interpretation of the field rather than a summary of a sourced description. JoelleJay (talk) 18:46, 21 May 2020 (UTC)