User talk:NDSUdave/sandbox

I had previously commented on Ashlynn's sandbox, because she sent me the link first. Please do all the rest Group 8's work on this page.

Comments on Ashlynn's sandbox
These are the comments I left on Ashlynn's sandbox talk page. Please let me know if you have made changes to address my critique.

Rating=2. Could be published with extra effort to improve quality. The first couple of sentences illustrate some general problems with this article: "William James’s stream of consciousness can be defined as, a state of thought where he believed that the contents of the human consciousness is like a “stream”. This stream is comprised of every experience that an individual has ever had and shapes their opinion." The first sentence is ungrammatical, and the second sentence is not supported with a reference citation. Group 8 needs to carefully proofread the entire article, and make sure that the statements are valid and supported. Also correct improper punctuation, e.g., "Buddhisms idea of "Mindstream"

Other problems and examples: - The section "Stream of Consciousness" contains exact quotes that are not enclosed by quotation marks. This is plagiarism, even if the source is cited. - The Principles of Psychology - italicize and follow with a reference citation. - "James describes stream of consciousness like this in his own words" - redundant and poor grammar - Proponents - this section doesn't actually mention any proponents - "Bernard Baars has developed Global Workspace Theory which bears some resemblance to stream of consciousness.[1]" - this belongs in next section - "The current view on the stream of consciousness has been a place for debate." - another instance of poor grammar. - "Those critics of William James’s stream of consciousness, such as Susan Blackmore, is a psychologist that challenges what James thought was how the human conscious processes life experiences." - more of the same

It is not my job to proofread this article and make corrections. I have just copied out a few examples. There is a lot of good content in here that is worth publishing. However, if you cannot see the problems with the text that I have copied out, I don't think you will be able to make adequate corrections to make this piece suitable for publication. J.R. Council (talk) 02:42, 1 May 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by James Council (talk • contribs)

Rating is still 2
Here's the first sentence: "William James’s stream of consciousness can be defined as, a state of thought where he believed that the contents of the human consciousness is like a “stream”." If you start off like this, it is still not ready to publish.J.R. Council (talk) 00:49, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

Edits made
With all the referencing and formatting done I noticed that there were some flaws within our organization and grammar. I have made some extensive edits. I took out the proponents section and changed it to James and Introspection--- due to that being the main topic of the paragraph. I took out one of the five characteristics because I looked at James' principles of psychology and saw only four. There were some other grammatical edits done. I feel this is where we are at with the article at this point. Do you guys feel we should move any of the sections around? It seems like it takes awhile for the stream of consciousness content to begin in the article. We've only got a couple more days to get this article trimmed up for publishing. Thanks. Gabriel.Gabriel.lillestol (talk) 05:57, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

Added References/Explanation
I changed the references for the four characteristics to be from James Psychology text from 1893, which was the briefer version of James, 1890. This went well with what he had in the article. The previous version had five characteristics, which was present in the original Principles of Psychology. I found that we did not have enough clear material to include the fifth characteristic. It is a hard concept to understand and with the little time remaining I feel that it is easiest to just keep it with the four characteristics. Gabriel.lillestol (talk) 13:35, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

Almost there
Here are a few minor details to fix up:

This idea was wrote about by psychologist, William James. - written about

he went on a hunting expedition - it wasn't a hunting trip - just delete hunting

James boldly addresses the fact that as humans, selective attention and deliberate will are examples of this phenomenon. - in humans, not as humans

Once you take care of these, you are good to go. Let me know when you get this published. J.R. Council (talk) 17:02, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Wiki war
You are in a wiki war now. Another user, nikkimaria, has reverted the article. If you look on this person's user page, he/she appears to be an experienced editor and administrator. I can kind of see the other editor’s point – if he/she views this as a general article on stream of consciousness, the focus on James may seem out of balance. I don’t agree, but this person seems pretty stubborn.

I don’t think you’ve wasted your time. Let me talk to Dr. Boyer. My suggestion is to submit this as a new article Stream of consciousness (William James). J.R. Council (talk) 21:09, 8 May 2014 (UTC)