Talk:Obedience

Philosophy: Ethics Start‑class Mid‑importance

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

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Mid

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

Associated task forces:
/
	Ethics

Psychology Start‑class High‑importance

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology 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.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Forty-nine charismatic virtues

Some content has been moved to Forty-nine charismatic virtues. Peter Manchester 13:13, 25 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Cleanup

This article consist of snippets of what it seems to be original research. We need attributions and citations from notable sources to substatitate the current text. Please help make this article compliant with Wikipedia policies. Thanks. --ZappaZ 23:47, 5 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Already done it, my friends :-) JCraw 12:09, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Spelling and grammar

This article needs extensive copyediting for grammar and spelling. -- The Anome 12:23, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

...and substantial improvement in every other regard. Flagged for {expert} attention. -- The Anome 13:24, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why? It's been referenced, i've checked the book in it's 3 editions, and the information is valid. I reverted because again, i can't shake the feeling this was done with far less than neutral intentions; afterall, this topic has, and is used by SEVERAL examination boards in the United Kingdom, as well as other european countries. Unless this is SEVERELY wrong, which is juxtaposed to the quanitifcation process which goes on in these places; i.e Creationism not being in biology. Very very suspicious. James S 20:48, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, can you explain what "which is juxtaposed to the quanitifcation process" means? -- The Anome 23:19, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 04:20, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hofling hospital experiment

The Hofling hospital experiment article is more-or-less orphaned. I don't want to add experiments willy-nilly to this article, but I'm leaning toward adding a short bit on it. Any objections?Cretog8 (talk) 03:43, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Knock yourself out -- _{Escape Artist Swyer} ^{Talk to me} _{The mess I've made} 21:24, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Spelling and grammar problems

I have begun fixing up the spelling and grammar. Kathy (talk) 04:05, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I finished copyediting this article. Someone might want to check to make sure none of my edits changed the meaning. I don't think they did, but some of the language was so dense I had trouble understanding what it meant myself. The article still does not read very gracefully, but at least you can understand what you're reading now. Kathy (talk) 03:45, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have a read through to check everything is alright! Pheebalicious (talk) 14:30, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Everything seems to good to me. Very readable. Pheebalicious (talk) 14:51, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copyedit and footnote tags

I found this article in the January 2007 section of WP:COPY and discovered only minimal copyediting was required. However, I did object to the text "obedience to God" being linked to Religion because not all religion is about that; if the in-text reference to religion is necessary (and I believe it is not as it is quite obvious), feel free to add something to the effect of "(eg. religion)". I also removed the footnote tag because the article's reference list is presented as in-text citations. If more citations are required, please use the {{fact}} template. --Falcon Darkstar Kirtaran (talk) 04:09, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

military?

Is there anything at all on obedience from the standpoint of the military? That'd be something neat to add. I'm researching for an essay on Milgram, and was wishing I could snag some nice sources from a Military Obedience section.... Darn. AllGloryToTheHypnotoad (talk) 20:32, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]