Talk:Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

This article 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

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Philosophical literature

Websites: Computing Low‑importance

	This article is part of WikiProject Websites, an attempt to create and link together articles about the major websites on the web. To participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.WebsitesWikipedia:WikiProject WebsitesTemplate:WikiProject WebsitesWebsites articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

Books: Reference works

	Books portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles
	This article is supported by the Reference works task force.

Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy vs. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

The article currently says: "The encyclopedia uses a traditional, closed procedure for commissioning and refereeing its permanent articles (comparable to that of the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: see peer review),"

I have read content from both encyclopedias and the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy is of much higher quality. Some of the content at the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy is frankly embarrassingly low in quality. Knox490 (talk) 07:52, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A example of what the philosophy community thinks of the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy: "Like Brian, I believe that the *Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy* is regarded as far less important than the *Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy*.[1] Knox490 (talk) 07:56, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've just noted a reference to the IEP by the American Library Association. This may be of assistance in gaining references for this Wikipedia article: http://www.ala.org/rusa/sections/ets/pubs/bestfreewebsites2016 Research17 (talk) 10:21, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Further, a reference to the IEP in Galileo: https://www.galileo.usg.edu/scholar/regu/databases/intj-reg1/?Welcome Research17 (talk) 10:30, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've now edited the website to include what I believe to independent and reliable sources, with also additional content based on those sources. In about a week or so I propose to take two actions: a) remove the template which indicates there is a lack of independent sources, and b) remove the section dealing with the IEP Mission. My rationale for the latter action is that this seems a little like advertising material, and in any case the content can be properly included in other sections. Please feel free to comment here if you think that either of the above actions may not be appropriate. Research17 (talk) 00:08, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Security issue (solved)

Access to the IEP via Google snippets and Official website in the article's External links is prevented by at least 3 browsers. On Firefox links lead to "Warning: Potential Security Risk Ahead", on Chrome "Your connection is not private", on Edge "Your connection isn't private". Mcljlm (talk) 02:19, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My antivirus software actually blocks access to the IEP website on all browsers because it considers the site certificate not trustworthy. (This was not yet the case in early December 2020; I could access it without problems from the same computer then.) --Yen Zotto (talk) 12:09, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

FYI: I contacted IEP editor-in-chief Jim Fieser asking whether they are aware of the access problems and if they're working on a solution. His answer was yes but it could take some time, given that IEP is a 100% volunteer project. --Yen Zotto (talk) 14:41, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Update: issue seems to be solved. --Yen Zotto (talk) 11:19, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]