Jump to content

Talk:Psychogeography: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 47: Line 47:


:This is a single purpose account that spams links to the Joshuaberlow.com domain to various articles. <font color="Green">[[User:Irishguy|'''IrishGuy''']]</font> <sup><font color="Blue">[[User talk:Irishguy|''talk'']]</font></sup> 20:10, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
:This is a single purpose account that spams links to the Joshuaberlow.com domain to various articles. <font color="Green">[[User:Irishguy|'''IrishGuy''']]</font> <sup><font color="Blue">[[User talk:Irishguy|''talk'']]</font></sup> 20:10, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't know what you mean by a "single purpose account". Romarkin is my screen name. I don't spam links, I just haven't written an entire article. Would you rather that I write an entire article somewhere? How do I get off your list as being a "single purpose account spammer"? I have put very few links on Wikipedia and only when I think they're appropriate. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Romarkin|Romarkin]] ([[User talk:Romarkin|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Romarkin|contribs]]) 20:20, 26 March 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


:The only edits from your account have been to add links to your own domain. That is a [[WP:COI|conflict of interest]] and it is [[WP:SPAM|spam]]. <font color="Green">[[User:Irishguy|'''IrishGuy''']]</font> <sup><font color="Blue">[[User talk:Irishguy|''talk'']]</font></sup> 20:35, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
:The only edits from your account have been to add links to your own domain. That is a [[WP:COI|conflict of interest]] and it is [[WP:SPAM|spam]]. <font color="Green">[[User:Irishguy|'''IrishGuy''']]</font> <sup><font color="Blue">[[User talk:Irishguy|''talk'']]</font></sup> 20:35, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 02:33, 28 March 2008

Origin of term

origin of the word psychogeography is from IS Definitions by the Situationist International. so i revert to that position User:Paki.tv (14:56, 29 June 2005)

Source for quote at start of article?

The quote in the introduction of this article is ostensibly from "Preliminary Problems in Constructing a Situation" in Situationniste Internationale No. 1 (1958). But the text of "Preliminary Problems" is online at [1], and I was unable to find that quote, or even the word "psychogeography," anywhere in it. Jd4v15 03:39, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've found the correct source for the quotation and edited the article accordingly. Jd4v15 20:10, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What is it?!

I stumbled across this article because it had a curious title, but the article does not go into any detail explaining what psychogeography other than a basic one-line definition. Can somebody flesh it out? BeardedPhysicist 04:37, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The useless prattle of a few megalomaniac malcontents?EricR 08:05, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I can make out its the practise of studying how travel effects the psyche and the emotions. In other words it is the study of the emotional/psychological effects of environments, particularly man-made environments. In some areas there seems to be a parapychological element to it too. But I'm not sure. I'm basing this latter on the Manchester Area Pychogeographical website featured in the links section. ThePeg 12:23, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Psychology categorization

The WikiProject Psychology template was recently removed from this article with the reason given that psychogeography is not related to psychology. If that is true, it should not be listed in Category:Psychology. In my opinion, either the project template should be restored or the category should be removed since the project directly handles all topics listed in that category. What does everyone else think? —Cswrye 16:42, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I added a link to Affordances, under the "see also" heading, because that seems to be what this piece is about... but in an obscurantist, neo-Marxist kind of way. If this is truly what it's about, then there does seem to be some potential as a theoretical project in psychology (perhaps by synthesizing it with an enactivist approach of Vygotsky?), but I don't see how to do that while at the same time preserving the anarco-radical spirit that seems so central to its current presentation. It seems more likely -- if we ignore the definition provided at the top and the bit at the end about the column -- that this is Wikipedia's version of the Sokal Hoax. I suggest this in the nicest possible way, of course, but the suspicion isn't helped by Will Self's bio: he writes satire. JTBurman 04:47, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ummmmmmmmmmmok.

I fail to see how this is geography at all. All sources indicate (entirely indirectly) that it is the practice of walking randomly in a city and making connections between what you see. It's not passive, practitioners seem to actively interact with their environment, affecting it -- which is a no-no for any serious matter of study unless your acts are carefully planned and intended.

What sucks is that neither this article nor any of the available links describe the topic adequately. This page (and others) is mostly spent talking about who and when but nothing about what, why or how.

Anyway, this page is becoming a link farm; the "groups" section should be removed or heavily condensed. - Keith D. Tyler (AMA) 18:44, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Overhauling page

Recently have completed a project about psychogeography and found this Wiki extremely underwhelming and unhelpful. I am in the process of adapting my work to create an in-depth entry that will hopefully shed more light on the topic. Please feel free to help me remove jargon etc. I hope this attempt succeeds. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheWarning (talkcontribs) (17:53, 1 June 2007)

Good luck, it's a mishmosh of esoteric tribal "knowledge" and unexplained neologisms and philosophy. It seems to be basically the practice of holistically attaching philosophical and metaphysical notions to an undirected and unobstacled walk through a city. Why it deserves its own name and study isn't clear. If you can show why it is distinct and what its method, and purpose, and expected outcome is, this article might be saved. - Keith D. Tyler 16:27, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maps

I've put the maps back. Please explain removal Paki.tv 23:27, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They're not maps, they are modern art pieces. They have no bearing on the article, are not referred to or discussed in the article, and do not serve to illustrate or elucidate any point within the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.241.229.177 (talk) 10:21, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please see the text - they are indeed referenced! Paki.tv (talk) 00:46, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The maps are referenced and relevant, and no good reason has been offered by the anonymous user who keeps deleting them. An anonymous user, by the way, who has made no improvements to the article. Deleting content without a good reason, and without explanation, is vandalism. ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 17:19, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The link that I put to The Baltimore Psychogeography Associaiton keeps getting deleted. The Baltimore/Washington Psychogeography Association has been renamed to The Baltimore Psychogeography Association. The link to the The Baltimore/Washington Psychogeography Association, (which I put there in the first place), is long out of date. The new link to The Baltimore Psychogeography Association is www.joshuaberlow.com/what.htm Please put it back on and don't remove it! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Romarkin (talkcontribs) 19:56, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is a single purpose account that spams links to the Joshuaberlow.com domain to various articles. IrishGuy talk 20:10, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The only edits from your account have been to add links to your own domain. That is a conflict of interest and it is spam. IrishGuy talk 20:35, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Irishguy has deleted the link to The Baltimore Psychogeography Association. But he (or someone) didn't stop there- another link to my site has been messed with on the Vampire entry. This is the link to the article Circumcising Dracula. Apparently according to Irishguy any link that I put to my own domain is a conflict of interest and spam, regardless of whether or not the link pertains to the Wikipedia entry. Then I was barred from making any further changes. To me this seems like heavy-handed nitpicking. All I was doing was linking to articles that pertained to Wikipedia entries. I thought other people would find the information linked to useful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.255.207.192 (talk) 22:21, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Irishguy is correct. Please stop adding those links. Thank you. ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 22:47, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]