The purpose of this page is to list articles that are possible challenges for editors. New articles may be added from the queue in the bottom of this page's source once these have been removed.

See Wikipedia:Cleanup for more challenges

We have a massive and detailed article on pain, but next to nothing about pleasure. Although pleasure is a crucial concept in psychology, philosophy and neuroscience, there's little but a stub. This needs fixing, though at the same time it makes sense. John J. Pershing at one point said "It is not pleasure but pain that a man must remember in battle."

It's still a separate emotion/sensation on its own - it doesn't have to be linked to pain, and isn't linked to it for many people. I agree a longer article would be appropriate (otherwise, pain is privileged.)Sinderbloog (talk) 16:00, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pleasure is also known as feelings. In the book or movie called Brave New World there was movies called feelies which had little depth of intellect but appealed completely to the senses as a pleasurable experience much like immorality, pornography or prostitution. Pleasure is derived from stimulation in a positive way that is created by the many forms of adult toys in a society that has much more time for play than generations ago. Many seek to live for feelings by shopping, watching movies, listening to music, driving their car etc...

Pleasure is not just a feeling or emotion. Sometimes it can be physical just as much as pain is. For example, a back rub can cause the physical release of hormores that affect the mind and causes our muscles to relax much like how pain causes the release of adreneline and causes our muscles to tighten.--TParis00ap (talk) 17:21, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've had a go at improving the introduction. -SpaceMoose (talk) 05:15, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Expand. This article should be much more detailed considering it is a major technology magazine in the U.S. Compare with the article on Wired.

Basic article, needs sources.

I'm working on it right now, looks like I'm going to just rewrite it from scratch. Ziggy Sawdust 13:35, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above user has been banned from Wikipedia. It looks like someone else needs to take on this challenge. --Pgp688 (talk) 11:45, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're on: I'll give it a go Daniel (talk) 10:47, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Current Luna Bowl "article" is a redirect to Luna Park, Cleveland (which itself could use a bit of expansion, a challenge in itself as the amusement park existed only from 1906 to 1929). The stadium framed by one or two roller coasters was an early multipurpose facility that hosted the Cleveland Panthers AFL team in 1926, a number of Negro League baseball teams, and the Cleveland Soccer Football Club. Details and reliable sources are hard to come by, but finding them would help flesh out an article on a key site of American sports and amusement history.

• I have just broken off a Luna Park article from a sizable disambiguation page, which had dozens of Luna Parks in a list, with the current Luna Parks without articles as redlinks and the remainder without blue links being delinked to avoid a sea of red. But each of these needs an article... and online sources are extremely scarce. The ones that will eventually be the real challenge are the parks opened by Frederick Ingersoll before his death in 1929 (he opened 44 of them, creating the first amusement park chain). B.Wind (talk) 07:11, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • New Luna Park page has dozens of entries - I've added a few, like Luna Park, Pittsburgh and Luna Park, Scranton. The Luna Park, Cleveland article has more, but much more is needed. At least Frederick Ingersoll is now up and running, but has nothing about his family business - or his brothers, for that matter. B.Wind (talk) 06:10, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• I have removed Luna Park from the heading as the list article seems to be in pretty decent shape (there are plenty of redlinks left...). Luna Bowl remains a redirect. Fortunately, a half dozen Luna Parks now have (at least stubs). B.Wind (talk) 05:26, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Current LunEur stub has been awaiting addition/translation from its corresponding article in Italian wikipedia (which itself barely outlines a history of a significant amusement park that existed for over 50 years and has a link to the 1960 Summer Olympic Games); there is no article at all for a predecessor park built by Frederick Ingersoll that lasted into the 1930's. Very little, if any online material exists on the earlier park.

Needs a lot of work for a very important article, but just paring down and have appropriate links to other skeleton articles might do too.also helpful

This article needs to be expanded and sourced. This is a featured article in Français, it puts ours to shame. An article on Boats should be a major article. I did a pretty good cleanup of the page, as it wasn't doing so well at all, but it needs a lot more work. In my opinion, an article on something so important should be at least up to the GA level.

Article needs to be rewritten and sourced -- it sounds like a translation in its current state.

Article is awkwardly written; needs to be completely rewritten.

For a topic so frequently discussed, I was unpleasantly surprised to see that the respect article is so short and so poorly written. It should be expanded to cover how respect is given in various cultures as well as a more thorough explanation as to what respect is. There are 336m google results, surely it can be improved upon.Smallman12q (talk) 22:23, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For an example as to how this article could be...see Standford "respect.Smallman12q (talk) 00:39, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah that sucks.--DunkinDonutBoy (talk) 03:46, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps Respect should be merged with honor? They are about the same thing, after all. --Pimpachu (talk) 01:49, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely: one can respect another person without honoring him/her.B.Wind (talk) 06:34, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've given it a go. -SpaceMoose (talk) 05:22, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article on the man himself (Osho) is much more detailed than that of his following. Currently contains one academic source and an article from the San Francisco Chronicle. Could use a great deal of expansion.

Both of these are extremely important politics articles, but are currently no more than messy stubs.