Diskussion:Filosoffer

Er det relevant at have Poul Bjerre oplistet her? Han er ikke kendt som filosof - jeg synes ikke, at han hører hjemme under sådan en oplistning som her, specielt ikke efter at have læst hans artikel.

På samme måde spørger jeg til Jiddu Krishnamurti. Det er en indisk filosof, der efter min mening mere hører hjemme under religion, østlig mystik eller lign. I artiklen om Filosofi fremhæves det, at det handler om akademisk eller videnskabelig filosofi (det jeg ville kalde vestlig filosofi) og ikke om østlig mystik. Sådan deler man normalt også f.eks. filosofihistorier op - skal sådan en opdeling ikke også gælde her som konsekvens?

Venlig hilsen Kattie

Name of the article

I think that this article should be renamed Liste over filosoffer. It gives nothing else than a short list that could be expanded if people didn't think it is an article about philosophers. If nobody objects, I will proceed with the new name on November 12th. Robin des Bois ♘ ➳ ✉ 9. nov 2006 kl. 03:41 (CET)

The subject has been discussed several times, and the current consensus is that we do not use "Liste over ". --Palnatoke 9. nov 2006 kl. 06:52 (CET)

No problem. I will restrain from changing it. I'm relatively new to the danish WP. I never noticed that you don't have official lists. Of course, this article would gain a lot if someone could develop it instead of simply listing a few philosophers. From a global point of view, we still treat this article as a list and the links to other languages may reflect that as long as the article serves only that function. Unfortunately, I can only decypher danish, so I can't help you in the process. Best of luck in finding a user that can do it. Oh, and by curiousity, can you tell me why it was decided not to have any list in your wiki. Sometimes it is a good way of planning a big development in a subject. Having such a list allows to see what new articles need to be created, an option you don't have using only with the categories. Regards. Robin des Bois ♘ ➳ ✉ 9. nov 2006 kl. 10:23 (CET)

Oh, we *do* have lists - we just don't *name* them "Liste over ...". The reasoning is partly that such a name becomes incorrect the moment someone decides to make a real article, partly that "Liste over " is unnecessary. It is also inconvenient in a category or list of articles (the subject of the article is less obvious, and you have to alphasort it manually). --Palnatoke 9. nov 2006 kl. 10:29 (CET)