Talk:Lev Vygotsky

message: I just added my sandbox to the main article page. A reynolds (talk) 17:06, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Vygotsky on education

message: Could someone write something about how Vygotsky's work on early child play and development influenced the tools of the mind program? I'm not qualified to write it myself but think it should be included in this article.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.64.151.59 (talk) 19:55, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Strictly speaking, there is no such thing as "Vygotsky's work on early child play": he and his associates never studied empirically play as such, although --by studying something else--they did frame it as a "game", but never questioned if the participants of the studies really perceived the settings as play. Yet, on a number of occasions Vygotsky did speculatively discuss child play in different contexts using it for illustrative purposes. Curiously, it was in this contexts that Vygotsky made dramatically different, furthermore, self-contradictory statements, such as: in some texts, "everything can be everything in child's play" AND, in other texts, "NOT everything can be everything in child's play". All this hardly qualifies as "Vygotsky's work on early child play" or even, as some say, "Vygotsky's theory of play", -- right?--Yasya (talk) 06:37, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  tools of the mind 

message: Is the statment in the article true/misleading: "In the West, most attention was aimed at the continuing work of Vygotsky's Western contemporary Jean Piaget."  I thought this was perhaps true for Europe, but the surely the USA had more of a behaviourst focus?--Dave Catlin 08:05, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess, the point is that both Piaget and Vygotsky had initially been virtually unknown and then "discovered" in North America; however, Piaget was discovered earlier. So, I would say the statement imho is partially correct, and should be understood as "[at the time when Vygotsky was discovered in the North America (i.e. publication of Thought and language in 1962)] most attention was aimed at the continuing work, etc." Yasya 23:43, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vygotsky - Piaget question 

message: Should Vygotsky be assiciated with Social Psychology?
I say why not; Lev's weaknesses(and his strength) was his social focus(some might say obsession).Dylanmiller 03:20, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Social Psychology question 

message: New Question: For those that have read much Vygotsky: do you consider Vygotsky to be an 'advanced human thought is linguistic by nature' totalitarian?Dylanmiller 03:20, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not sure I understand either the question or even its possible origin... I would say there is nothing totatitarian in LSV, even, on the contrary, I would say his approach is radically anti-totalitarian. Yasya 04:24, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

text: I would guess that the question is asking for Vygotsky's position on the connection between thought and language. I've come across some discussion recently the causal relationship btwn thought and language. The most intuitive position is that thought precedes, and causes, language. But apparently there is evidence that language also shapes our thought process. I believe DylanMiller is using the word 'totalitarian' to ask whether Vygotsky is a strict adherent to this belief, rather than to ask if he supported political totalitarianism. 70.165.160.13 (talk) 16:04, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''totalitarian Vygotsky'' question 

message: No, not Belarussian at all. One might call LSV a Russian or a Soviet psychologist, but definitely not a Belarussian one (despite the fact that he was born in Belarus, indeed). I am changing this into "Soviet" Yasya 04:24, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Belarussian psychologist 

message: What are the similarities between the Piaget's Cognitive development theory and Vygotsky's Social development concept?
:For some similarities as well as major differences between Piaget and Vygotsky see, e.g., Vygotsky, Thought and language, chapter 2. Yasya 20:35, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Similarities between Piaget and Vygotsky 

message: I suggest keeping only the most important monographs (btw, quite numerous, so far) in this section with rare exception given to the most outstanding articles. Yasya 06:44, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What exactly article do you mean? Yasya 00:44, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Oh, I see what you mean. You are talking not about bibliography on Vygotsky, but the external web sources... I restored this section as well as categories and links to the article in other languages. Yasya 03:27, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Books and Articles about Vygotsky's Work 

message: The article, overall, has always seemed quite confusing and hardly readable to me. So, I am announcing the beginning of a major clean-up. Suggestions are welcome! Yasya 14:03, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yasya, I am willing to contribute. I have studied Vygotsky's work for some time now.  Let us know which direction your clean-up is taking.  (Btw, did you say you had put the references back? I only see then in the History of the page. I agree that the original list is a bit too much but some source references and the link to Vygotsky's archive online seem useful to me). Jsarmi 15:21, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess, somebody's been very creative with the article: I reverted it to the older, 'normal' version. Please have a look at it and you'll have all the references, interwiki and other stuff restored. Generally, I think, since last September the article has improved to certain; however, there is yet a lot to do. Presently, we need to improve the quality of the sections that we have so far as well as to add several other ones, like, Defectology or Vygotsky's Brain studies, etc. I think the best strategy in doing this would be to rely on the authoritative scholarly works, those by van der Veer & Valsiner (1991, 1994), Veresov (1999), Lifanova & Vygodskaya (1996/1999) (see the reference section of the article) as well the various stuff done by Cole and Wertsch definitely being my favourites. --Yasya 17:45, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major cleaning has started 

message: There seems to be a mistake in when Vygotsky died. According to the page at the moment, he died of Tuberculosis in 1934. However, throughout the text, most of the reference to his work is to 1978.
[[ The latter dates refer the dates of the English translations; Vygotsky did die in Russia in 1934.  Frankatca 17:02, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: For the history of Vygotsky's translations into English see Influence and development of Vygotsky's ideas in the West. --Yasya 14:18, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needed 2 say 

message: A mention of the famed '30 million words-heard gap by age three' study(1)of Drs. Betty Hart and Todd Risley -- an analysis of thousands of hours of recorded conversations in a mix of 42 Kansas City homes, professional, middle-class, and welfare, with follow-up, showing up to a 20 I.Q. point difference, two standard deviations, directly attributable to children's home language environment may be worth including in this article as confirmation of Vygotsky's evidence of the profound connection between speech and cognition.  However as this is not Vygotsky's work, it may not qualify.  Your thoughts?  Frankatca (talk) 19:55, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confirmation of importance of speech to cognition 

message: This article would be improved by an explicit bibliography of Vygotsky's published work. And known [English] translations. 
Should the following be listed, for which Vygotsky is an author?
Thought and Language by Lev Semenovich Vygotsky
Educational Psychology (Classics in Soviet Psychology Series) by L.S. Vygotsky
Mind in Society: Development of Higher Psychological Processes by L. S. Vygotsky, Michael Cole, Vera John-Steiner, and Sylvia Scribner
The Collected Works of L.S. Vygotsky: Volumes 1, 2 &  3: Problems of the Theory and History of Psychology (Cognition and Language: A Series in Psycholinguistics) by L.S. Vygotsky, Robert W. Rieber, and Jeffrey Wollock
And the following, for which Vygotsky is the principal subject?
Lev Vygotsky: Critical Assessments: 4 Volume Set (Critical Assessments) by Peter Lloyd
Lev Vygotsky: Revolutionary Scientist (Critical Psychology) by Lois Holzman
The Cambridge Companion to Vygotsky by Harry Daniels, Michael Cole, and James V. Wertsch
Vygotsky's Psychology-Philosophy: A Metaphor for Language Theory and Learning (Cognition and Language: A Series in Psycholinguistics) by Dorothy Robbins
Lev Vygotsky (Continuum Library of Educational Thought) by Rene Van Der Veer
The Essential Vygotsky (Vienna Circle Collection) by Robert W. Rieber and David K. Robinson
Vygotsky and Pedagogy by Harry Daniels
Vygotsky and the Social Formation of Mind by James V. Wertsch
Parallel Paths to Constructivism: Jean Piaget and Lev Vygotsky by Susan Pass
Vygotsky's Educational Theory in Cultural Context (Learning in Doing: Social, Cognitive and Computational Perspectives) by Alex Kozulin, Boris Gindis, Vladimir S. Ageyev, and Suzanne M. Miller
Frankatca 17:02, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bibliography? 

message: This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 04:14, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject class rating

message: As I read though "Mind in Society, the development of higher psychological processes" (Vygotsky, 1978), I am impressed with the idea that much of his work could potentially be applied to adult learning theory as well. We tend to revert back to 19th century learning models when we are in higher education environments. I wonder what Vygotsky would have thought of this. I welcome comments and feedback.  Echoecharlie (talk) 23:34, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vygotsky and adult learning theory 

message: An anonymous editor [12.219.16.217] deleted the valuable external links on this page.  Is this vandalism? Or a valid and helpful edit?  I consider it vandalism.  Frankatca (talk) 13:54, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links? 

message: I suggest that the above stub be merged here, as it is a statement about Vygotskyan psychology. That's if there is anything worth saving at all. Itsmejudith (talk) 21:06, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Maturation and environmentalism]] 

message: I removed this from the external links: http://www.uga.edu/columns/102797/bboard.html . The relevant context seems to be the announcement of the conference. I suppose this could be used as a biography reference due to the information about Vygotsky's family, though I imagine there are far better sources for that. Otherwise it seems like a deadend, aside from the fact that such a conference happened. Maybe its proceedings would be more relevant? 
"Cognitive Studies conference 
The Cognitive Studies Group of the Institute for Behavioral Research will hold its annual mini-conference Oct. 29 from 1 to 4 p.m. at the Athena Room of the Horence is open free to the public.Vygotsky, Culture and Children's Learning." The conference is open free to the public.
Speakers include Gita L. Vygodskaya, retired senior research associate at the Academy of Education, Moscow, and daughter of Lev Vygotsky; Jon Tudge, associate professor of human development and family study at the University of North Carolina-Greensboro; Elena Kravtsova, granddaughter of Lev Vygotsky and co-director of Project Golden Key, an alternative educational approach implemented in more than 30 child centers in Russia; and Ann Cale Kruger, associate professor of educational psychology and special education at Georgia State University. For more info, contact Paula J. Schwanenflugel by phone (542-4273) or e-mail." Jodi.a.schneider (talk) 08:30, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link removed 

message: Miller, 2002 is repeated cited in the section: criticisms of Vygotsky. But Miller 2002 is not listed under the references. Can anyone clarify this issue? I would like to read Miller 2002. 204.15.27.108 (talk) 17:15, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I assume that it's this: Miller, P.H. (2002), Theories of developmental psychology (4th ed ), New York: Worth Publishers. I do not have a copy and have never read it, but I have added this now after first instance, as it's the only authour and date that seems to fit. I am surprised this is being used as the principal in-line ref when it seems to be a general work and not specific to Vygotsky. BridesheadRecarpeted (talk) 11:29, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vygotsky citation issue: Miller 2002 

message: Multiple versions. I have made one adjustment per Mind in Society.  If you are a Russian-English translator would you please provide the standard format for transliteration?--Te Karere (talk) 03:01, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: As a result of finding multiple sources with shared spelling - Wertsch (1985) and Moll (1992) - I have changed the spelling from the Mind in Society version.  Assistance from translator still welcome.--Te Karere (talk) 20:38, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Spelling of middle name

message: I've noticed that some of the references aren't using Wikipedia's system; I saw Miller (2002) at one point instead of the superscript [#] and the full reference below. Is this okay? I have no idea how to go about rectifying this but I thought I'd bring it to attention. Cheers. Frosty050 (talk) 09:13, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  A few of the references aren't Wikipedia-standard 

message: is inserting a very large section on what is apparently a paradigm shift in thew making in Vygotsky studies, the section is almost entirely based on very recent articles by A Yasnitsky and R Van der Veer. According to his user page User:Yasya is identical with A. Yasnitsky and the section seems to be a likely breach of WP:SELFCITE and WP:Weight. I may be wrong but I would be more comfortable if someone other than the author in question would comment on whether there are possible weight issues in the way this revisionist movement is portrayed. The further reading section is almost entirely populated with publicatyions by Dr. Yasnitsky. ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 18:26, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  the section is almost entirely based on very recent articles by A Yasnitsky and R Van der Veer -- Not correct, which is obvious to anybody willing to inspect the references to the sections in question, namely, 5 Criticisms of North American "Vygotskian" legacy & 6 Criticisms of available Vygotsky's texts. Please feel free to remove any or all publications by Dr. Yasnitsky if only it makes any sense.--Yasya (talk) 18:38, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: if, as our lead says "Vygotsky is the most popular Russian psychologist in Russia and North America" then there should be LOTS of different sources and the article should widely reflect the various scholarly takes. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 19:46, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure. Not only the most popular, but also, apparently, the most controversial. And the article does quote quite a number of these different sources, I believe. Please feel free to check out Lev Vygotsky#References. --Yasya (talk) 20:03, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Weight issue and possible COI

message: Cultural mediation and internalization
Vygotsky investigated child development and the important roles of cultural mediation and interpersonal communication. Through cultural mediation, not only was knowledge accumulated and passed on, but the means of furthering an individual’s cognitive capabilities were transmitted to the next generation as well.  This was done through the use of symbolic systems that naturally develop within a culture – “cultural semiotic systems” (Gosawmi, 2008, p. 391).
These cultural semiotic systems allowed for symbolic representations of knowledge to be developed, which would then act as tools children would use to further their own cognitive development.  Thus, these systems were seen as a means of cognitive behavior organization by Vygotsky.  As the brain develops, these cultural semiotic systems would work congruently with the elementary mental functions that Vygotsky believed all infants were born with to guide cognitive development. The means in which this occurred was through parent-child interaction in which the child would pick up and internalize the tools of the cultural semiotic system.  Internalization can be understood in one respect as "knowing how". For example, riding a bicycle or pouring a cup of milk are tools of the society and initially outside and beyond the child. The mastery of these skills occurs through the activity of the child within society.
“Because these symbol systems are the product of sociocultural evolution (they are not reinvented by each individual), Vygotsky saw sign systems as social in nature” (Gosawmi, 2008, p. 391). Because of this, Vygotsky viewed sociocultural mediation as key to cognitive development in children.  The symbolic tools transmitted by adults, which were created through the development of the culture, guided cognitive development in the child, who would then use those tools as a means of organizing/structuring cognitive behavior. Vygotsky believed that it was those symbolic tools created within a culture that allowed for those mental functions to move beyond their basic capabilities. This is a further aspect of internalization, that is appropriation, in which the child takes a tool and makes it his own, perhaps using it in a way unique to himself. Internalizing the use of a pencil allows the child to use it very much for his own ends rather than drawing exactly what others in society have drawn previously.
Goswami, U. (2008). Cognitive development: The learning brain. (pp. 391 - 392). New York, NY: Psychology Press.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elli7047 (talk • contribs) 02:37, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Goswami might be a really smart guy, but I am just wondering how exactly this stream of consciousness is reflected in Vygotsky's own -- rather than Goswami's -- writings. Generally, looking at a person (i.e, Vygotskii in our case) through the eyes of another person (i.e, Goswami in our case) is not a particularly rigorous method and reliable practice, I guess. --Yasya (talk) 14:52, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed revision to Cultural mediation and internalization 

message: Shouldn't Marx be mentioned in the side panel as an influence?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.70.94.185 (talk) 23:41, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have any source to support this? Martinevans123 (talk) 18:53, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  marx 

message: This site http://downloadgratizzz.blogspot.com/2013/05/perkembangan-anak-menurut-vigotsky.html includes a copy of some of the material from this article, but it is copied from herewhich can be verified by comparing the dates in which the text was online. Just to note that this material is not plagiarized in this article but the plagiarism is the other direction.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 18:44, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought that everything at Wikipedia was free for anyone to use and was wholly without copyright? Martinevans123 (talk) 18:53, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: It is not without copyright it is a license that requires attribution. I.e. you can use it if you say you got it from wikipedia. But my point here is mainly that it is that site copying us and not vice versa.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 20:54, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, good point. Does Mr Wales pursue offenders, relentlessly, through the law courts, on our behalf? When was the last multi-million dollar out-of-court-settlement that we've all missed? Martinevans123 (talk) 21:16, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: If they did it I'd be a rich man by now.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 21:42, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: External site plagiarizing this article: not a copyvio

message: Sure, Martinevans123, you are absolutely right, mea culpa :) --
The book has not been printed yet, but when it does, -- as some people who have read it say -- it is going to be a nice thing. Well, we'll see. In the meantime, thanks for removing the reference. One might want to restore it, in due time :). --Yasya (talk) 23:01, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Yasnitsky, A. (2018). Vygotsky: An Intellectual Biography

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Lev Vygotsky. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130204083839/http://www.psyanima.ru/journal/2012/1/index.php to http://www.psyanima.ru/journal/2012/1/index.php
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130204083839/http://www.psyanima.ru/journal/2012/1/index.php to http://www.psyanima.ru/journal/2012/1/index.php
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130204083839/http://www.psyanima.ru/journal/2012/1/index.php to http://www.psyanima.ru/journal/2012/1/index.php
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140529234220/http://www.toolsofthemind.org/philosophy/vygotskian-approach/ to http://www.toolsofthemind.org/philosophy/vygotskian-approach/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:00, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Lev Vygotsky. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130921060750/http://www.psyanima.ru/journal/2012/1/2012n1a1/2012n1a1.1.pdf to http://www.psyanima.ru/journal/2012/1/2012n1a1/2012n1a1.1.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131220025809/http://www.psyanima.ru/journal/2011/4/index.php to http://www.psyanima.ru/journal/2011/4/index.php
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131220025809/http://www.psyanima.ru/journal/2011/4/index.php to http://www.psyanima.ru/journal/2011/4/index.php
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131220025809/http://www.psyanima.ru/journal/2011/4/index.php to http://www.psyanima.ru/journal/2011/4/index.php
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:14, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: It seems like the introduction to this article would be confusing to an ordinary reader who does not have a great understanding of psychology. Perhaps the main points of the article could be summarized more clearly and in a way that is easier to read? I find that most readers of Wikipedia read the introduction to the page and nothing else, so this should be kept in mind as the article is edited.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emilyavr (talk • contribs) 23:33, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduction 

message: He is not Soviet, anymore. He is Belarusian. Please refer to him as a Belarusian psychologist, instead of a Soviet psychologist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:446:8201:2630:1A:D0DB:861B:A074 (talk • contribs) 13 May 2021 (UTC)
:Well, he is dead. Through most part of his life, there was the Soviet Union, so I think it's very okay to call him a Soviet. The article itself states "was born ... in the town of Orsha, Belarus (then belonging to Russian Empire) into a non-religious middle-class family of Russian Jewish extraction". Also, see Talk:Lev Vygotsky#Belarussian psychologist. I think Wikipedia should not be a platform for promoting revisionist patriotic sentiments. -- marilyn.hanson (talk) 02:23, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Soviet vs. Belarusian (again) 

message: I was reading the complete works section and noticed that only one of his scientific publishings was listed; I am going to search out his work and attempt to catalog as many as I can find throughout the availability of the internet.  Any who find sources confirmed to be written and published by him should aid this catalogue as well.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nstanton99 (talk • contribs) 22:19, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vygotsky's Works 

message: As you can read in WP:Manual of Style/Lead section, the lead section is supposed to be a fair summary of the subject. Some consequences of this fact:
# There shouldn't be anything in the lead that isn't reflected in the rest of the article
# Usually, citations in the lead are redundant, unless it concerns statements that have been challenged or are likely to be challenged
# The lead should be very neutral and it should focus on the most relevant things
Currently, the lead is very much not that: 
* The second paragraph was simply moved in there from somewhere else
* The second paragraph is written from one perspective and goes into way too much detail
* The first paragraph is one long sentence that mentions some things that are not what Vygotsky is most known for, in a lot of detail, yet seems to leave out the things that he is most known for
So, here's what I'll do:
# Move text that belongs elsewhere in the article from the lead to there
# Rewrite the lead almost from scratch
I plan on doing this soon. Yasya, please don't undo my edit or parts of it without discussing it first; as it is quite impactful, others will be scrutinising it too, so if it really is bad, someone other than you will do something about it. Of course, I cannot force you not to undo, but given that it's your mess that I'll be cleaning up and that it is definitely perceived as a mess by other editors, your undo would probably be undone itself and the discussion would take place anyway.
There is also a bunch of stuff in the lead that should not be in the article at all, but cleaning that up is a matter for later. Kind regards from PJvanMill (talk) 13:40, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, PJvanMill. We all rely on your well-informed, expert and fair judgement. Good luck!--Yasya (talk) 20:26, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yasya, am I correct in seeing a hint of sarcasm there? Obviously, I am not an expert like you, but I will certainly try to be fair. Thanks for your cooperation and sorry if I was a bit harsh. Kind regards from PJvanMill (talk) 10:07, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Dear User talk:PJvanMill, I can only repeat that I fully rely on your respected judgement and take no offense, thus, no apology is needed. Furthermore, I greatly appreciate the quality, style and, especially, the neutrality of your recent changes! Frankly, I see the entry is in really good hands from now on, and am fully withdrawing from watching and editing this entry. Please rest assured that no irony or sarcasm whatsoever is meant or implied here. Staying respectfully yours,--Yasya (talk) 14:54, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for the kind words, Yasya. In line with the WP:COI policy, I think withdrawing from editing this article is a wise decision. I suppose that means the COI tag at the top of the page can now be removed. Kind regards from PJvanMill (talk) 15:22, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead section cleanup 

message: How's Vygotsky pronounced in , say AmE? Backinstadiums (talk) 17:18, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation 

message: There is no "Vygotsky Studies" according to Google Scholar but very few people talking about it. There are also no "Freud Studies" or "Pavlov Studies" in similar wiki pages. Vygotsky page is not the place to talk about which sources are better - just point to the proper source. 72.85.191.143 (talk) 22:29, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing section about "Vygotsky studies" 

message: It is a shame how poor is this article written and organized. Luckily, there is a Russian version in pretty good shape. Please check it for yourself with Google translator. It is informative, clear written, and well researched. I will try to take it as basis to rewrite an English version. Any help is appreciated. 
Links may be in disarray for some time, but I will clean them up after the work is done.
If you think it is not a good plan and you have one better - do tell. 72.85.191.143 (talk) 03:08, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Please have a look at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and fix the attribution issue. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 02:21, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for pointing that out. I am using Russian version of the page as guidelines to keep structure clear and to hit all major topics, but text itself gets rewritten and updated, trying to avoid copying any expression or formulations. 72.85.191.143 (talk) 02:43, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, okay, thank you for the clarification. I think to be on the safe side, I'll later add attribution in an edit summary and at the top of this talk page. The general approach is fine copyright-wise at least because the origin is a Wikipedia page. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 02:58, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Attention - major rewrite is in progress 

message: I could find no source for Vygotsky's works being banned in the Soviet Union. I've seen multiple works claiming this, but none cite an actual source. 2001:1970:5CD7:6500:0:0:0:DE60 (talk) 19:30, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Here's one, but admittedly not brilliant. But here's quite a good book source. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:44, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vygotsky's works being banned in the Soviet Union.