Talk:List of psychic abilities/Archive 1

Section header inserted here

Draws Heavily on a single source, thus many statements are dubious.BrainMagMo (talk) 08:03, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Needs complete overhaul to simple list format

While the AfD was for Keep, that was largely because people recognised that a suitable Wikipedia article could be written for this title. What is currently written was heavily criticised, and should not stand for the many reasons given in the AfD. The article should resemble something like this simple version of the page. That's what a wp:stand-alone list on this topic should look like, there is no need to detail each "psychic power" because they all have their own articles or to provide a lot of general commentary that belongs in psychic. I'll be changing the article to that state, please comment here if you have any objections based on Wikipedia standards. I know the primary author has put a lot of work into this, but I'm afraid it's just one of those cases where the work isn't appropriate to an article with this title on Wikipedia. The work will still be available in the history, so parts of it can be merged into the other articles I've mentioned. Ryan Paddy (talk) 00:52, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

The level of detail given for each ability has gotten out of hand again. Such fine detail should only appear in the articles about each ability, it is redundant here. This page should only have very brief descriptions of each ability. Ryan Paddy (talk) 02:04, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Don't add psychic powers from fiction

This is a list of psychic powers that have been notably attributed to real world people, not a list of paranormal abilities belonging to fictional characters. For that reason I've removed empath and pyrokinesis, which are almost exclusively used in a fictional context and only notable in that context. Ryan Paddy (talk) 22:14, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Query

In the spirit of List of topics characterized as pseudoscience shouldn't this be List of abilities characterized as psychic? ScienceApologist (talk) 04:34, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Dunno. If there's a difference, perhaps it's that the "pseudoscientificness" of the subjects in that list may be contraversial, whereas the "psychicness" of the subjects in this list is not. If these psychic abilities exist, then they are psychic. QED ;) There are only a couple of abilities listed here that have plausable non-psychic explanations (other than "they don't exist, it's all in our imaginations"). I recall being directed to a ruling saying that the lead to articles like this shouldn't use qualifiers such as "purported psychic abilities". Probably the same principal applies to the title: it doesn't need saying that psychic abilities are purported, because that's obvious, like saying "list of fictional Pokemon characters". Ryan Paddy (talk) 04:51, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Agree -- I don't see why anybody would dispute that the abilities are psychic. Whether anybody actually has any of them is of course open to dispute, but that doesn't change the nature of the abilities. Looie496 (talk) 05:47, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

I also agree. This is a completely different situation. At List of topics characterized as pseudoscience the question is not whether acupuncture, to use an example, exists; it is whether it is pseudoscience. --Hans Adler (talk) 17:57, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

wondering

i often get a dream and then some day's later in real life it happens then for the entire day is this a type of psychic abilitly cause i get it a lot im not lying cause even today was a one of those day's that happend before in a dream. user--Stephendwan (talk) 19:11, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Please don't post messages like this -- talk pages are intended to be used for discussion of how to improve an article, and improvements need to be validated by reputable published sources, not by personal experience. Regards, Looie496 (talk) 19:49, 10 November 2009 (UTC)