Talk:Tony Wright (sleep deprivation)
 | This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
|
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
NPOV issues
editDoesn't really present his hypothesis fairly, not including, say, any criticism or dubiousness about his claims. Titanium Dragon (talk) 11:03, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Well why don't you put up the criticism of say, the Bible? Plastic Dragon (talk) 11:03, 29 June 2010 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.252.213.34 (talk)
I don't think that's a reasonable comparison. This purports to be scientific research. As such, it needs to be properly scrutinized. A lay reader could easily be fooled into thinking these are reasonable theories that have been subjected to peer review and critical analysis, when that is manifestly not the case. Let's not beat around the bush, this is a guy who believes in telepathy[citation needed]. Currently there is a feeble section on support for the theories; surely at the very least there should be a section on the many obvious flaws. Whatthefat (talk) 21:38, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
Majority of article not relevant to his notability
editMr. Wright is notable for his purported sleep-deprivation record, not his theories about it. Anyone wanting to learn about them can follow the links. Perhaps they deserve a line or two, but not more than (say) 10 percent of the article -- and definitely not a wide majority of it. --tgeller (talk) 15:13, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
Article seems to contradict itself: claims he holds the record, but then documents his error. Admittedly not in Guinness Book. SO...Why is this article here and linked from Sleep deprivation?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.136.98.60 (talk) 15:18, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
How long did he stay awake for?
editThe article seems to missing a pertinent piece of information - namely, how long he actually went without sleep for? It's implied that it's between 264 and 276 hours but couldn't it do with being specified? 212.9.31.12 (talk) 07:31, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
- 266 hours. --Bejnar (talk) 18:17, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
Support for theories
editThe following unverified paragraph was removed from the article on 31 December 2013.
- Despite such a young proposal, his theories have received support from various researchers in the fields of neurology, anthropology, and psychology; attracting researchers such as Colin Groves, Dennis McKenna, Robert Greenway, and many others.
If you have a source or sources that support this statement, it or an appropriately supported version of it may be readded. --Bejnar (talk) 18:14, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
Wha ?
editWhy is this an article? - theWOLFchild 19:55, 10 December 2014 (UTC)