Talk:Motivational speaker: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 01:20, 19 March 2010

	Society portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Lacks sources

This article lacks sources, and contains phrases such as "It is fairly agreed", "Another concern raised is..." and "Experts debate the long-term value of...". It also, to my mind, seems to be too favourable in tone, lacking any substantive objective critisism (which I am sure exists) of the industry. Ailahusky 23:12, 9 May 2007 (UTC)ailahusky[reply]

Agree

I was going to the discussion page to exactly highlight the lack of sources and the richness of random assumptions in the article.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.87.98.224 (talk • contribs) 15:47, 23 May 2007

Why is so much attention devoted to bashing religious motivational speeches?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.70.16.43 (talk • contribs) 03:07, 17 August 2007

Me, too. Wikipedia is not a how-to guide, nor an editorial. This article has some very significant problems. 71.174.226.117 20:34, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think I did a decent job of editing out the bias. Anyone like to take a second look? Tserton 02:31, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The edits you did are good, Tserton, but the article still needs sources and still violates WP:NPOV, imo. I added tags. I will be watching this page and nominating it for deletion without MAJOR repairs. Right now, it's nothing more than a biased essay. Keeper | 76 16:09, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rename

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 23:10, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Motivational speaker → Motivational speaking — because a subject-oriented name is more encyclopedic.--Booksoul (talk) 01:33, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support, I agree, an article on the subject of motivational speaking in general is much better than only one on people who do it and the title should reflect that. Recury (talk) 19:04, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Criticism

Where's some criticism on the whole idea of motivational speaking? 97.118.63.76 (talk) 01:20, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 27: / Line 27: @@
 *'''Support''', I agree, an article on the subject of motivational speaking in general is much better than only one on people who do it and the title should reflect that. [[User:Recury|Recury]] ([[User talk:Recury|talk]]) 19:04, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
 :''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a [[WP:RM|requested move]].  <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.</div><!-- Template:RM bottom -->
+== Criticism ==
+Where's some criticism on the whole idea of motivational speaking? [[Special:Contributions/97.118.63.76|97.118.63.76]] ([[User talk:97.118.63.76|talk]]) 01:20, 19 March 2010 (UTC)