User talk:Dapplegrim

When considering possible philosophical theories it is counter productive to eliminate possibilities except that they inconsistent or irrelevant. Philosophical theories need to be evaluated on their own merit not by criteria determined by contrary theories. 10:32, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Re Bruce Robertson, The Pattern Paradigm
I see that you have restored citations to Bruce Robertson, The Pattern Paradigm, Xlibris, 2012 in sever articles, including our one on Truth. Since as far as I have been able to determine, this is a self-published work of no particular academic renown, this seems to me inappropriate - Wikipedia philosophy articles should be based on recognised material, rather than that of unknown or little-known authors. If I am wrong about the notability of the book, and you can provide e.g. reviews in reputable academic philosophy sources, I will of course reconsider, but meanwhile, I ask you not to add such material.

Given that your only contributions to Wikipedia seem to relate to this book, I have to ask the obvious question: are you either Bruce Robertson himself, or in some way related, financially or otherwise? If so, I should point out that per Conflict of Interest policy, adding such promotional material is grossly inappropriate.

I am going to remove the material relating to Robertson's book again for now - and should it be added once more, without evidence that it has had appropriate academic recognition, I will raise the matter at the appropriate place - Wikipedia is not a platform for the advertising of self-published works. Instead, I suggest that you provide evidence (on this talk page to start with) that the book has had the appropriate recognition, and make clear your relationship - if any - with the author. AndyTheGrump (talk) 13:55, 17 November 2012 (UTC)