Template talk:PhilosophyTasks

Guidelines: 

''This task box lists open tasks on philosophy articles. Anyone may feel free to add a task. If you are unsure, ask here or on WikiProject Philosophy first.''

If you wish to add this list to your User: or User_talk: page, it would be much appreciated. To insert it, add   to your page. To add the pretty boxed version see on WikiProject Philosophy, use   instead. This will automatically add the code for the box to your page, including.

Any comments about the layout of this task box (or anything else, for that matter) would be much appreciated. &mdash; Adam Conover | Talk

The following are guidelines for the tasks template:
 * Everyone is invited to add articles that they feel would benefit from the attention to the invisible queue in the template. If an article has been on the template for a while, feel free to rotate it with an article from the queue, and either delete the old item or move it the bottom of the queue.


 * The template should be relatively succinct. When putting a new item on the template, it is preferable to replace an old article rather than simply tacking on another article.  Be bold about this; if someone feels the replaced article still needs help, it will make its way back on the template eventually.
 * There should be a balance of different philosophical areas on the template. If one topic area, such as Epistemology or Ethics, appears to dominate, please replace some articles with those from an under-represented field.

Archives
 * |up to March 2006

Derek Parfit
Added to Standby list for c/e, because this article and the one on his book, Reasons and Persons, lack all phil-portal refs. I might do some of the major editing to move text over to the book article, after I've read the book; adding the templates and categories is still a little beyond this newbie's expertise.--TJ 15:01, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

re-jig
A change is as good as a holiday! I am going to modify the layout. My aim is to simplify, and so hopefully make the template more usable, and hence more used.

Hey, if you don't like it, tell me. Banno 21:09, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Suggestion
The subject "inverse_(logic)" looks pretty good to me. I wonder if it has been improved since it has been on the to-do list, and should now be removed. - Rdanneskjold 3:30 (UTC) 6 Oct. 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rdanneskjold (talk • contribs)

How do I add important tasks to the ToDo list
Yes, I'm a n00b to Wikipedia - but not to publishing or academia. I can be taught. I am doing a lot of copyediting backlog, orphan backlog, etc in fields where I have some background. That means I'm coming across quite a few philosophy articles, like Husserl or Kellogg Lewis or Kripke, where it is clear that they have been start class for too long. Some are high importance. Is there a list I'm missing, where I could have applied my efforts to those articles, however humble my efforts may be? I do not believe Kripke should be "high importance," but if he is, someone should really work on that article. If no work is done after years of it having tags on it, shouldn't it automatically be "low importance" (if it were important, someone would edit it, no? am I wrong?)--Levalley (talk) 05:36, 22 April 2009 (UTC)