Talk:The 2005 Global Intellectuals Poll

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of WikiProject Education, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of education and education-related topics. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to featured and 1.0 standards, or visit the WikiProject page for more details.
Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Contents 1 Sources 2 Long list? 3 criticism 4 Article's name is wrong 5 List should be last 6 The List

[edit] Sources

The criticisms need to be much better sourced. It states "Much better lists of intellectuals are based on objective criteria", but, what does that mean and what really makes it better? That is original research and opinion, not to mention the list of omitted people. Those aspects need cleanup. gren グレン 05:30, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Who is "Nim Chimpsky"? Rather embarrassing typographical error or the work of a witless fool?

A popularity contest to decide intellect: do we really need a criticism section?. :)

[edit] Long list?

What's the "long list"? The article doesn't explain what it is.

[edit] criticism

there was much more criticism and someone deleted it. why did they delete it?

this is bogus

71.103.112.197 sp0

Please see the WP:RS and WP:OR policies. <<-armon->> 05:11, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article's name is wrong

This is not "The" list, this is Prospect Magazine's list. This article should be titled "Prospect Magazine's 2005 Global Intellectuals Poll". Any good reason for me not to rename the article? Gronky 00:18, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

I propose "List of influential public intellectuals" as a title. Incorporating key words into the title improves the chances of locating the article through search. Palaeovia 01:49, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

That would make it a general list, compiled based on general information (not based on Prospect Magazine's poll. Gronky 08:51, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] List should be last

Wikipedia's role is to discuss this list, not to present it. Discussion of the list should come before the actual list in the article. Gronky 08:52, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The List

The list is rather long, especially since one of the external links goes to the list, i think that we should just list the top 10.--Kip Kip 19:30, 25 May 2008 (UTC)