Wikipedia:Peer review/Jerry Fodor/archive1
Appearance
This artcile has been granted Good Article status and seems to meet the vast majority of criteria to become a featured artcile. But it would be useful to have some input concerning the section on objections, the length, struture of the artcile or other matters.--Lacatosias 13:08, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
- It's 53kb long. You should really try to decrease that. The recomended max article size is 32kb. Jtrost 18:06, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
- thanks for the response. On the oher hand, I've seen some articles that are either at or near FA status which are somwhere near 90KB Leon Trotsky and 60 or 70KB in length. But I will try to cut out something. It's difficult to figure out where without cutting back on the substance.--Lacatosias 08:15, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
- I don't know. I've cut it down to 50 and I already feel as if I'm cutting into the meat of the article. Any suggestions on what, where and how to cut?? Input from people with a philosophy background would obviously be most welcome here. Don't just write "good article" on my talk page!!--Lacatosias 09:26, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
- A long article, as indicated through kb size, is not itself wrong, but is symptomatic of something else that is wrong. In this case, it is my opinion, that there are two articles here: 'Jerry Fodor' and 'Philosophy of Jerry Fodor'. The article presented here is dominated by the results (and some consequences) of the subject's work. An easy solution may be to move this page to Philosophy of Jerry Fodor and in Jerry Fodor provide a biography of the man's life, including where he is from where he studied, his influences, the methodology of how he works/thinks, how his career has progressed, and so on. For the section on his philosophy provide a clear, absolutely dumbed-down summary (so a high school student can understand) with a see this article message. This current article's introduction is only four sentences and they only provide the categories of his philosophies - not what he has argued for or against. --maclean25 19:22, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, I've aslo come to the conlcusion that the article needs to be split, but I'm not exactly sure how. Your suggestion about separating biography and philosophy is probably along the right lines. The only difficult is that, not being an historical figure but a living and practicing philopher, info about Fodor's actual life and career is limited and hard to obtain (I don't know of any biographies of Jerry Fodor that have been published). I'll have to look more throughly into it.I will look around and see how others have handled contemporary,, living thinkers and see if I can find ideas in this way as well. --Lacatosias 09:25, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
- P.S. almost forgot. Thanks for looking over the arctile and taking the time to post an opinion.--Lacatosias 09:28, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
- Hmmm...What I've done now is essentially just taken the subsections of each of the main sections, e.g. "Fodor on Mental Content", and put them in seperate articles, leaving a summary behind for each section. I will expand the biography as I have found some more info in this respect and the arctile is now below 30KB and can be cut be split up some more if necessary. I would appreciate any inoput in this respect. Have I cut too much? in the wrong places? left things unclear, etc?? --Lacatosias 10:50, 9 February 2006 (UTC)