Talk:Poetic naturalism

	This redirect was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This redirect was accepted from this draft on 22 August 2016 by reviewer SwisterTwister (talk · contribs).

Philosophy

This redirect 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

Untitled

Response to reviewer comments: I clarified which Sean Carroll wrote the book, sorry for the oversight. I added a "public reception" section to show that people are taking notice of the book and the philosophy. Oraxis Telson (talk) 19:13, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notability?

It's just something that one guy talks about in his book, it doesn't seem like a school of thought that goes much beyond that one guy. Why is this its own article? --90.156.104.160 (talk) 15:27, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Sean M. Carroll

I think poetic naturalism is a good, interesting, and notable enough thing to talk about on Wikipedia. However, it does not appear to have notable interaction with anyone outside of one man's book. While there is a brief reference to poetic naturalism in Sean M. Carroll, it does not have a proper explanation. I believe this topic should be discussed on the page of the man who's idea it primarily is, and is the chief person talking about it.

Unfortunately, I am a new Wikipedian, and do not have the confidence in my ability to do the task. I am proposing this merger for discussion so more editors can see this and potentially help in merging these articles, should that be determined the best idea. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheGreatConsultingDetective (talk • contribs) 02:51, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've merged the content to the article on the book, which was rather short otherwise. XOR'easter (talk) 03:34, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you have merged, why is this here still up? Biohistorian15 (talk) 19:12, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]