Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 03:43, 24 June 2008

Wikification

Eye movement in reading needs to be Wikified! So here's what needs to be done:
Check if the article is a copyright violation or meets deletion criteria.	✔ check
Suggestion: Do a quick Google or Yahoo! search with a sentence from the article.
Check if another article already exists on this subject.	✔ check
Suggestion: Use the Misplaced Pages search to see what comes up.
Add Misplaced Pages markup.	✔ check
Suggestion: Read up on m:Help:Editing.
Format the article.	✔ check
Suggestion: Read up on Guide to Layout and Manual of Style.
Remove the {{wikify}} tag (if there is one).	✔ check
Join the Wikification effort! • How to use this template

--SB 02:51, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
I've removed

==Peripheral input and integration across fixations==
==Refixation==
==The eye–voice/eye–hand span==

because they were empty. If someone was inprogress with them I appologize and suggest adding them back in as you have content ready. --SB 03:36, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

???

I thought this article was about how the eyes move while reading printed language. I see only history and methods of measuring eye movements. --Kvuo 04:20, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

You're quite right: the article has only just begun. I sort of have the knowledge to complete it, but only until about 2000. I'm waiting for someone else to volunteer. Tony 15:04, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

This page needs to return to its original title: Eye movement in language reading: in answer to the assertion in the edit summary, no, wrong, you read music and you read language. Expecting a reversion very soon. This is not the way we do things. You raise the issue on the talk pages first, and wait probably two weeks for feedback. TONY (talk) 03:03, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Eye movement in reading, formerly named Eye movement in language reading, is over-elaborated: the "language" portion is unnecessary as there can be no reading unless there is language medium. Furthermore music is also a language, and naming an article explicit in reading text would not clarify it any futhur. I apologize that the warrant came after the move; seeing that the discussion pages has been well under-develop (last addtion: almost a year ago), a sign of inactivity, there was no need for one. The main purpose for this renaming was to help clarify it for the disambiguation page. Misplaced Pages does not have a consensus that a move warrent requires a wait of "two weeks for feedback"; in fact it is quite the opposite, if a change occurs: it can be challenged, and either removed or improved. WP:Be Bold WP:BRD ChyranandChloe (talk) 02:57, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

• No, I'm taking steps to revert the change in the page name. There are two issues:
  • Your argument that music is a language draws on a rather elaborate use of the word "language" that I think might pass by most readers. Strictly speaking, it's correct, but morse code and the symbols used in video games could be broadly characterised as "language" too, if you want to stretch the point that far. People talk of "the grammar of film editing". There was nothing ambiguous to the normal reader about the previous title.
  • In removing "language" from the title, you have privileged the reading of language over the reading of music, by making language the unmarked, default form. This is not a distinction that a NPOV publication should be making. Furthermore, by your logic, the article on music reading should be subsumed into this one, since music is "a language" in the same soup as linguistic text.

Now, are you going to revert the change, or do I have to bother learning how to do so? TONY (talk) 03:39, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and I'll thank you not to vandalise the link to "Eye movement in music reading". How dare you. Heck, I think I'm going to treat you like a vandal from now. TONY (talk) 03:43, 24 June 2008 (UTC)