User:Malgreat/sandbox

I am not highly-familiar with editing Wikipedia pages but often I spot things that I suspect are wrong and I just want to report these specific things without learning the much-deeper "full-process," of learning "how" to insert specific edits. This has happened before with an earlier account I had that eventually lapsed.

The only thing I want to call attention to about the article, "Ideomotor," is the name of the concept, based on its etymology.

Although I've already gleaned that the currently leading prevalent "usage," here is the one Wikipedia is already "using," namely, "IdEomotor--;" (emphasis added)--; the "etymology," of this construction, "ideo+motor," the second part's right of course--; the "first" part, "ideo," relates to, "ideas--:" Example, the psychiatric clinical term, "Ideaphoria," "idea," "(of) idea(s) + phoria "that which is 'borne--;' 'production,' or, 'flow,' --."  meaning, "thought-pressure," or, ideas prematurely "displacing" each-other in the flow of cognition, not allowing "any one," of them to, "play-out," sufficiently.      "The sense," that is being "expressed" here instead is "parallel," to that expressed in the term, "idiopathy--;" from physical medicine, which refers to a set of presenting or recorded recent history of physical symptoms for which no consistent "diagnosis," can be made.  "idio," "without grasp," + "pathy," "illness."

Although I realize "now," that in the former example, "Ideaphoria," the first combining form, "idea," is "not," necessarily "the same," as that in your term, "Ideomotor," since the former ends in "a," while the latter ends in, "o--;" the differentiation furnished by the choice of the, "i," versus the, "e," is "more," "relevant--;" because the trailing vowel is more a, "combinant-accessory," unlike the, "i-or-e--;" which is "integral," to the respective, "combining-form."

Although the form already in predominantly-prevalent "use," appears to have had an unfortunate period of, "imprintation," on the community "mind," this word is "still," "obscure," enough that Wikipedia could have "tipped," the balance in favor of one that was more logically, "consistent," if it had "wanted" to--; and I would think that if any language/logic force would have "wanted," to have followed, "logic," "not," "the," proverbial "bandwagon--;" that it would have been, "Wikipedia." "I," for one "believe," that the usage "should definitely" be "shifted," from, "idEomotor," to "idIomotor," because when I "first" saw this "term--;" it took me a long time to figure-out what it might have "referred-to--;" until I finally realized that the first "combining-form," might have been an embarrassing "corruption-of," the otherwise totally-familiar combining-form, "idio--;" clearly-meaning, "without-grasp--;" again, as in, "idiopathy--;" and then I, "grasped," what the word was supposed to mean, "instantly--:" "bodily, 'movement,' ," of-which one is, "unaware--." I immediately-thought, "why" were they making it "harder," to guess without look-up what this rare word "meant," when it would be "so easy" to "fix" that by correcting that first "combining-form?" I think that's "a great word." But it risks, "dying-out," if people have trouble, "grasping," it--; and by unnecessarily "keeping" it with an ambiguous, corrupted, "first-half--;" anyone is unnecessarily sentencing a "fine," science-term, to an early rejection and disappearance from the language, when one doesn't have to let that happen.