Talk:Understanding Consciousness

Following IRWolfie's suggestion I have added some more information and independent sources for this stub below for others to add in if they wish to improve this stub:

The first edition of this book was shortlisted for the British Psychological Society Book Award in 2001 and 2002, and the first and second editions have received many reviews. See for example extracts at http://www.amazon.co.uk/Understanding-Consciousness-Max-Velmans/dp/0415425166/ref=ntt_at_ep_dpi_1

Full text reviews are available online at Harris, K. (2009) Review of Max Velmans Understanding Consciousness. Metapsychology, 13 (52) http://metapsychology.mentalhelp.net/poc/view_doc.php?type=book&id=5300&cn=396 Faw, B. (2009) Book review of Max Velmans, Understanding Consciousness (2nd ed.) Journal of Consciousness Studies. Vol. 16, No.9, pp103-108 http://www.imprint.co.uk/pdf/16-9_br.pdf Zeman, A. (2001) The paradox of consciousness: a review of Understanding Consciousness (2000) by Max Velmans. The Lancet Vol. 357, Issue 9249, p77. http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(05)71582-8/fulltext Batthyany, A (2002) Consciousness in the natural world (a review of M.Velmans, 2000, Understanding Consciousness). Theory & Psychology 12(3), pp. 415-417. http://www.psych.ucalgary.ca/thpsyc/Reviews12(3).pdf M Velmans (talk) 13:42, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

No secondary sources
Hi, Pls can you reason why the tags were removed with this edit without improving the article. It still has no secondary source. Widefox ; talk 15:51, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
 * sorry to bounce you around, but also here too -> . where there's some agreement on the talk page about needing secondary sources. Widefox ; talk 15:57, 8 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi Widefox, the article had three tags on it. This is a well-known book, and unless there's reason to doubt the summary, it's best either to leave it as it is or to add sources, but adding tags doesn't achieve anything, except to disfigure the page. SlimVirgin (talk) 17:07, 8 November 2012 (UTC)


 * I've added some sources, including one the author posted in the section above. SlimVirgin (talk) 17:42, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Good work, regards. Widefox ; talk 20:35, 8 November 2012 (UTC)