User:Dhernandez98/sandbox

Robert Nozick
- Added descirption of the “Experience Machine” with source,. Added from “The machine described in his thought experiment” to “indistinguishable from real life experiences.”

- Added some biographical information on Robert Nozick including him being a professor at Harvard (article link to Harvard added) and

- Added the entire paragraph on the utility monster which is currently the last paragraph under Robert Nozick. Added several links to other articles in the passage including a link to “thought experiment,” “utility monster,” and “reduction ad absurdum.” Some more revision on wording, grammar, etc. may be needed. I was having trouble creating the citation for this section of information but I will be sure to add that soon.

Scientism
— Removed entire article section of Scientism because it wasn’t well described and mentioned no relevance to the Philosophy of Happiness. Perhaps further research might unveil the connections but thus far I see none.

Cultures not seeking to maximise happiness
- I am considering removing this section in general because it is especially unspecific and non-inciteful. The opening sentence was the only sentence in the whole sub section so I added a small amount of information on Utilitarianism to draw some more relevancies. A source is certainly needed for my added description.

Peer Review Response
My peer editor "KeneliaWilliams" made some useful comments on my work I have done thus far on my Wikipedia article. However, there weren't really any suggestions for how I can improve my article but rather just things they thought I did well. Below I have listed the useful quotes from their review and have responded to their incites.

1. “The content that was added was missing information that helped the article”

- I'm glad that the content I added was appreciated by my peer editor. The section I added the most information too I certainly felt needed some more expansion. There were some other small changes I made that I also feel like helped the article feel more complete. I will continue to use my judgement to determine what else might be needed and where sections are lacking.

2. Reviewer claimed that my article wasn’t biased, a misrepresentation of facts, and was neutral.

- This provided me incite to believe that my tone and language used was well-received and conformed to Wikipedia guidelines. I tried hard to not put my personal biases in my sentences because I do have a stance on some of the topics I discussed, such as the actual implications for Robert Nozick's experience machine. I will continue to use the speaker voice I exemplified in my work thus far.

3. “Is all the content backed up by a reliable source of information? For the most part yes. There is only a few which was stated would be provided later on because of some issues.”

- I added a couple sources to the article that I believed would back other people's work but wasn't able to add the source that I used for my lengthy paragraph I wrote. I am now able to add the source because I solved the issue that was preventing me before. I'm glad that a peer verified my sources that were used.

4. "Yes the sources is accurate to my knowledge."

- Thank you for verifying that my sources were accurate. I will continue to use sources that express and exemplify accuracy in the similar ways that my other sources did.

5.“Everything I read was clean and easy to read for other readers”

- I tried my best to make my sentences well structured and easy to understand for those who weren't well versed in Philosophy. There is a lot of jargon that the average person without a philosophy background wouldn't be familiar with. I did my best to avoid these terms. It's refreshing to hear that this was well received by my peer editor. I will continue to use my judgement for what I believe an unversed reader could discern.

6.“Just a few grammatical or spelling errors”

- I do wish that my peer editor mentioned what grammatical or spelling errors they noticed. After a read through I wasn't able to find much so some suggestions would be very useful. I will be more diligent to make sure there aren't grammatical or spelling errors and might reach out to my peer reviewer to find out what they were referring to.

7.“The content was well-organized

- I also felt that I did a good job with the information I added to the article making sure it was well organized and well placed. I'm happy this was noticed.

8.“Yes, the article needed some of the content that was added to make the article better.”

- Thank you confirming my belief that the content I added was useful for bettering the article as a whole. There are some other ideas I have for content that could be added so I will use my same judgement I used for my other edits.

9.“The strengths of the content was the paragraph added to the work that was already there. It made it more interested.”

- I also find the content I added very interesting and inciteful. I am a big fan of thought experiments in Philosophy and find them very useful for making points more clear. My lengthy elaboration on the Experience Machine and Utility Monster seemed to me very important additions to the Philosophy of Happiness. I will add there implications for further ideas and theories to make the content even more inciteful.

10. "The content added can be improved by trying to find some more information with more sources."

- Thank you for the recommendation on how I can strengthen my article. I agree that some sources would be useful for other readers and editors to refer to. I have looked into some other relevant sources and have found some that would improve the article even more.

11. "This was a good article too edit and the content that was added and content that was deleted made the article better for readers who will read about this topic."

- I'm very happy to hear that my peer editor also felt that the content I deleted wasn't really relevant because I was on the fence about that decision. I did research into the topic of scientism but really couldn't find meaningful relations to the Philosophy of Happiness so I hope my peer reviewer also did this as well. Thank you for providing me with some useful ideas and opinions on my edits for my article.