Talk:Reason
Appearance
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Reason article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 90 days |
This level-3 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The contents of the Reasoning page were merged into Reason. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
In addition to the archived discussion here, there is some past discussion at Talk:Reasoning |
Articlle issues and classification
[edit]- Article fails the B-class criteria #1 with a 2016 "citation needed" tag. Reassess to C-class. There are many unsourced sentences, paragraphs, and subsections. Reassess to C-class. Other issues: The Article lead is bloated with six paragraphs. -- Otr500 (talk) 05:27, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
Categories:
- C-Class level-3 vital articles
- Wikipedia level-3 vital articles in Philosophy and religion
- C-Class vital articles in Philosophy and religion
- C-Class Philosophy articles
- High-importance Philosophy articles
- C-Class epistemology articles
- High-importance epistemology articles
- Epistemology task force articles
- C-Class logic articles
- High-importance logic articles
- Logic task force articles
- C-Class ethics articles
- High-importance ethics articles
- Ethics task force articles