User talk:J-Marie B/sandbox

Article Evaluation
Article : Skepticism

For me, in this article, everything is relevant but the article is pretty short when you think of the importance of this concept. This article is devided in three principal parts ; philosophical skepticism, religious skepticism and scientific skepticism. But there is a huge difference between the size of the paragraph talking about philosophical skepticism and the two others. I could imagine that this article has been written by some people interested by this aspect of skepticism. A lot of facts and examples could be added to the paragraph about religious and scientific skepticisms. But even if all the parts are inequal, the article seems to be neutral and is more about definitions than opinions. A lot of links are given in the article to define the multiple terms used to describe the skepticism.

But some names are given in the article whitout any reference (Like Hume). On the talk page, most of people talk about the religious and philosophical skepticisms without really talking about the 3rd paragraph about scientific skepticism. The last person on the talk page wrote in 2016. This article is rated C-class on the quality scale, otherwise it has no place on the scales. It is part of different wikiproject ;

WikiProject Philosophy WikiProject Psychology WikiProject Atheism WikiProject Skepticism

On Wikipedia, the tone used to talk about skepticism is more formal, but also less complex and less explained than in class.