Talk:Free will

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former featured articleFree will is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on December 21, 2004.
Article milestones
January 19, 2004Refreshing brilliant proseKept
August 26, 2006Featured article reviewKept
June 8, 2008Featured article reviewKept
May 12, 2012Featured article reviewDemoted
Current status: Former featured article
Listen to this page (42 minutes)
Spoken Wikipedia icon
This audio file was created from a revision of this page dated 15 September 2006 (2006-09-15), and does not reflect subsequent edits.

Unintelligible grammar[edit]

The section "Experimental Psychology" contains the sentence "For instance, priming subjects with information about an effect increases the probability that a person falsely believes is the cause." There is a noun missing between "a person falsely believes" and "is the cause". As it stands, this sentence has little or no meaning. This is clear when the sentence gets simplified to: "Disclosing an effect makes it so that a person falsely believes is the cause." The noun cannot be inferred from the rest of the sentence nor from the cited source, so I don't know what it's supposed to be, so I cannot fix it. ----Cowlinator (talk) 22:51, 21 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Causal Determinism[edit]

The text reads that Quantum Physics provides a serious counterpoint to determinism, yet there is no explanation given. I wanted to add a why? tag but it didn't work. Superposition of particles does not dispute causality. Desdinova (talk) 03:06, 25 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The first sentence of this article needs to be restated.[edit]

The way the opening sentence is worded, "free will" is a scientific fact, not a belief, feeling, or theory. 2600:8801:BE01:7C00:D7:BFCA:E351:6CA7 (talk) 19:41, 7 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Article issues and classification[edit]

Reassessed article as it fails the B-class criteria. About half the "Further reading" needs trimming. I read where only 3% of Wikipedia articles have this section and apparently, someone felt it should be exhaustive here. Otr500 (talk)

External links[edit]

I am cutting all but the top three "External links". Some future discussions may change these around. Three seems to be an acceptable number and of course, everyone has their favorite to add for four. The problem is that none is needed for article promotion.

  • ELpoints #3) states: Links in the "External links" section should be kept to a minimum. A lack of external links or a small number of external links is not a reason to add external links.
  • LINKFARM states: There is nothing wrong with adding one or more useful content-relevant links to the external links section of an article; however, excessive lists can dwarf articles and detract from the purpose of Wikipedia. On articles about topics with many fansites, for example, including a link to one major fansite may be appropriate.
  • WP:ELMIN: Minimize the number of links. -- Otr500 (talk) 07:26, 14 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]