Talk:Pre-lucid dream

'Unusual behaviour'

I have reverted this addition because it seems to me not to belong here; it is not an argument for the term 'pre-lucid' rather than 'near-lucid' like the existing bullet points.Ranger2006 (talk) 23:39, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Semantics

If a dreamer thinks he's awake, then realizes it's a dream, everything between these events is a pre-lucid dream, as it becomes lucid once the dreamer realizes he's dreaming. Yet, if he questions if he is dreaming, but doesn't reach the right conclusion, and eventually wakes up for real, it was never a lucid dream, and pre-lucid would be an inaccurate description. -24.149.203.34 (talk) 13:53, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Right. In this case, don't take "pre" to mean "before" in the literal sense. It just means it's the amount of lucidity that comes right ahead of a lucid dream (not necessarily in time though). Even though this might be confusing, there are 3 good reasons given in the article for using "pre-lucid" instead of "near-lucid". --BennyD (talk) 20:02, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sentence I Deleted

I feel the sentence I have deleted belongs rather in the article on lucid dreaming. In any case the criterion proposed is not fool-proof as, particularly in a Type 2 false awakening, one can seem to wake up in one’s own bedroom.Ranger2006 14:03, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re Liability to pre-lucid dreams

I have reverted the edit to the third sentence from the top, because I feel it is incorrect to limit the liability to pre-lucid dreams to people who are cultivating one particular method. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ranger2006 (talk • contribs) 18:50, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

re 'admit of' in last sentence

I have re-instated the word 'of' because I feel this is the more correct usage. 'Admit' on its own seems to me to have the connotation of human agency, which does not apply in this context.Ranger2006 —Preceding undated comment was added at 19:01, 25 September 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Pre-lucid vs Near lucid

I find it confusing that this article and page are entitled "Pre-lucid dream," and yet the section labeled "Terminology" seems to say that "near lucid" is a preferred and more accurate term for the phenomenon than "pre-lucid," as well as being more common in practical usage. I suggest that the page URL and title should be changed to "Near lucid dream" or else this terminology section revisited.

I agree that confusion has been created by someone adding 'near lucid' in the place they did, and I have therefore deleted these two words. Ranger2006 (talk) 22:05, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

98.102.79.214 (talk) 19:10, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

My impression is that prelucid, pre-lucid, nearlucid and near-lucid should probably be merged into, and redirected to, the lucid dream article. —Paleo Neonate – 23:31, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The term 'near-lucid' is inappropriate in my opinion as a synonym for 'pre-lucid', and as far as I am aware it has not acquired any currency as an alternative term. I consider it is inappropriate because it begs the question of whether someone having a pre-lucid dream is always nearer to achieving lucidity that someone having any other sort of non-lucid dream. Some pre-lucid dreams turn into lucid ones, but not all. I therefore think the title should not be changed, nor should the article be merged with the lucid dream one. Ranger2006 (talk) 22:05, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

New material

@Gonzalezle: I noticed your new additions. We have WP:NOTHOWTO which may be against such instructions lists. Also, make sure that you agree to license your text under CC BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL (which may be a problem if you also used that text elsewhere). Finally, most of those paragraphs would need to be appended by a source showing that the paragraph summarizes it. The style of the encyclopedia is of course different than that of papers and essays. For numbered lists, you can also use the # character prefix as a bullet. Thanks, —Paleo Neonate – 16:55, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]