Talk:virtual darkness

In discussions of the value of Darkness Therapy it is suggested that "virtual darkness" is much more easily tolerated than actual darkness in treating people with bipolar disorder. The long period in darkness may be made up of some few hours of virtal darkness follwed by a long period of actual darkness while sleeping. Rhansler


 * Academic definitions from a single article only are not likely to meet the criteria for inclusion. Wiktionary has a different function and different rules from Wikipedia's. Is the term "virtual darkness", in the sense you have defined it, in accepted use that can be verified with three cited quotations that make it clear that the sense given in the definition is the sense used in the article. Embedding a theory in the definition will necessarily make it much harder to find quotations that unambiguously confirm that the sense given is the sense meant. DCDuring 15:11, 5 November 2007 (UTC)


 * To verify the sense given, we need cited quotations from three separate, permanently recorded, published works that use the term in a way that is clearly the sense given in the definition. The longer and more theory-laden the definition, the harder it will be to find those works. Feel free to discuss this here or on my talk page or in the RfV discussion. I recommend that you ask your first questions on my talk page; then we could progress to here. The RfV discussion should be to the point, if possible, and in accordance with the RfV process. DCDuring 15:19, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

virtual darkness
Looks like rubbish to me. Also caps are bad and so is plural. SemperBlotto 16:42, 4 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I moved it to l.c. The definition given doesn't seem plausible as a definition. It looks like some speculation about the effect of low-light conditions on visual perception and the possible association with the commonly used (set?) phrase. There is something funny about the phrase "virtual darkness". Is it an idiom? DCDuring 17:04, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Wouldn't it be possible (logically) to make a comparison of two forms of "virtual darkness", to compare "virtual darknesses"? Not that I wouldn't move heaven and earth to avoid such a locution. DCDuring 17:15, 4 November 2007 (UTC)


 * If we were to keep it, my definition would be something like "an extremely dim lighting condition" - just to show that it doesn't mean "virtual" as in virtual reality. SemperBlotto 23:16, 4 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm going to work with the guy who put the RfV'd sense here because there may be an actual perceptual psychology or psychotherapy sense that would meet CFI. I've only seen one reference so far. DCDuring 15:22, 5 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I have inserted a more inclusive technical sense, which needs more verification. There seems to be a lot of work in trying to come up with ways of generating the physiological effects of total darkness without requiring actual total darkness. I can use the cite provided for the original sense (now with RfV-sense, not RfV) for the broader sense. DCDuring 16:59, 5 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Cited. Challenged sense is heavily theory-laden and far too restrictive. There is a non-SoP sense that refers to simulated darkness in experiments or controlled conditions. This sense is derived from the ordinary SoP sense of darkness that is "virtual" and not "utter". I have cited (4 quotes) the more general definition. DCDuring 21:00, 21 November 2007 (UTC)