Contents

Talk:Reason

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.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

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:

Philosophy: Epistemology / Logic / Ethics High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Associated task forces: /  Epistemology Logic Ethics

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

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)[reply]