Talk:Niels Bohr

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Featured articleNiels Bohr is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on November 28, 2013, and on December 27, 2023.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
March 2, 2013Good article nomineeListed
April 21, 2013WikiProject A-class reviewApproved
October 27, 2013Featured article candidatePromoted
On this day... A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on October 7, 2017.
Current status: Featured article

'Quantum Physics' philosophy section and source variety[edit]

The philosophy section that discusses Bohr's perspectives on quantum physics is an obtuse amount of writing that relies on one source all throughout (other than one that was purely anecdotal.) This needs to be improved - every sentence seemingly ends with [29]. Tea-caff (talk) 06:41, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What source are you recommending? Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:46, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't mean to be destructive. Let me explain. The source predominantly used is by Jan Faye and it is on Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, which, while being a good source, it's not a good practice to use Faye's ideas and nobody else's. (Since its copying one encyclopedia over to another and using their efforts.)
I recommend finding the sources that he draws upon as a starting point (in the bibliography.) This will cause readers not to be redirected SEP, but to the actual source that Faye is referring to at many times. Of course, Faye is an expert on the topic, so his books, such as Niels Bohr and the Philosophy of Physics Twenty-First-Century Perspectives would be a better way to appreciate him and include the breadth of his research. Further, it would be best to use other sources that are mentioned briefly in more depth, such as "The transcendental philosophy of Niels Bohr" by J. Honner that opens this section, as upon looking at the source, whoever added it seemingly footnoted the first line of the paper and added nothing else (and the first line of that paper redirects to another footnote. That may cause a footnote 'goose chase' if you get what I mean.)
Academics such as L Rosenfeld (Niels Bohr's Contribution to Epistemology,) Aage Peterson (The Philosophy of Niels Bohr) who worked as Bohr's assistant from 1952-1962, and Kristian Camelliri (Bohr, Heisenberg and the divergent views of complementarity) all have good things to say on the topic which would enrich Faye's general overview. (Especially in relation to views on complementarity.) Tea-caff (talk) 01:37, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have checked out Dugald, Niels Bohr's philosophy of physics; Honner, The description of nature : Niels Bohr and the philosophy of quantum physics; and Angeloni, Unity and continuity in Niels Bohr's philosophy of physics. I have downloaded the articles by Camelliri and Honner. Philosophy is not my field, but I will read through them and see what I come up with. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 04:37, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]