Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Philosophy

message: What was a poor article is now an odd article mainly about Hinduism. Some decent sources although I don't know if they are being used properly, some not so good sources such as letter from an ISKCON leader.. I'm not familiar with the subject so hope others can look at at. Doug Weller talk 08:53, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Not seeing the “mainly about Hinduism” aspect. Seems to be just one short section of the page. More JudeoChristian coverage would help, up to experts in that area. Hyperbolick (talk) 18:26, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess so but sadly I’m not sure about the sources used although the one that is a copy of a letter is bad. Doug Weller talk 20:17, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Classical theism]] 

message: Need to find a free image of Rudolf Carnap. Where is this one from? Cake (talk) 17:52, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: If here is to be believed, it is under copyright :( Shapeyness (talk) 12:53, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey, at least it's only until 2026 for some of them... Psychastes (talk) 20:57, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text:  how did you figure out 2026? Shapeyness (talk) 09:08, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Not necessarily that specific picture (though I suspect it's one of the earlier ones), but the pictures in that archive are dated "1932,1930,1935" so some of them (and yes, I suppose we'd have to do additional research to figure out which ones...) will enter the public domain in the US in 2026, or 95 years after creation. Psychastes (talk) 17:11, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Well shoot. Nice try and nice find though. Cake (talk) 11:49, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Carnap

message: There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Capital punishment#Requested move 1 April 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. RodRabelo7 (talk) 01:58, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move at [[Talk:Capital punishment#Requested move 1 April 2024]] 

message: There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Limitarianism (ethical)#Requested move 4 April 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. – robertsky (talk) 13:22, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move at [[Talk:Limitarianism (ethical)#Requested move 4 April 2024]] 

message: Hello,Please note that Exploration, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of the Articles for improvement. The article is scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing! 
Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:05, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement! 

message: There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Absolute Infinite#Requested move 1 May 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject.  ASUKITE 14:58, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move at [[Talk:Absolute Infinite#Requested move 1 May 2024]] 

message: Dear friends—
Your input would be much appreciated at Talk:Separation of powers#Splitting off 'branches of government': The solution to finally advancing past 'start class'?, particularly if you think of yourself as a member of the social and political philosophy task force.
Separation of powers is a central concept in normative and descriptive political theory, and a widely-known concept among the general public, generally through participation in high school civics. As such, its perennial status as a start class article is a real shame.
I put its disorganization, lack of concision, and many POV problems mostly down to editors' confusion about what the article should focus on. This confusion is, of course, common to many broad-concept and academically challenging articles.
In my opinion, separation of powers is best described as a (multi-faceted) normative proposal about how to organize political power in political philosophy discourse and in constitution-making; and the application side of this principle is primarily a matter of constitutional theory and law. 
Yet, in the article, there is an enormous amount of (unsystematic) content pertaining to individual countries' branches of government (belonging, I think, to the academic discipline of descriptive political science; comparative government, specifically). I have just proposed that these sections be split off into an article called 'branches of government' (or similar).
If you would like to see a rigorous approach to political philosophy concepts like 'separation of powers', I am convinced that adopting my proposal is the crucial first step. But I wish to hear your perspectives; my perspective may be too close, or I may not be considering all the options.
I thank you for your help. §§ LegFun §§ talk §§ 20:41, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for input on political philosophy topic: Splitting 'separation of powers' 

message: Is :Category:Physical paradoxes correctly classified as being "within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy"? The talk page of the article Physical paradox gives it as of interest to solely WikiProject Physics.  --Lambiam 06:53, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Physical paradoxes