Talk:Confidence

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Confidence article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

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

Non-encyclopedic nature

This article does not read like a page from an encyclopedia. It reads like a page from a self-help book. It's unnecessarily flowery and dramatic, and the structure of the first sentence is extremely confusing.

65.49.39.70 (talk) 00:10, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

original research ?

someone added original research tags to sentences in this article, while this may be the case, I find those words to ring particularly true, as if I've heard that elsewhere I hope someone can cite works that come to the same conclusion because I also found the way those sentences were put together enlightening 67.212.7.249 (talk) 07:25, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, if that's original research, it's really good original research. I think it should be kept. Jesin (talk) 00:33, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP:HEARSAY Is not sufficient to establish WP:v, no matter how you slice it. Please establish a reference soon, or it will be removed.Ethanpet113 (talk) 07:51, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Middle ground between being confident and overconfident

Overconfidence can be a pro or a con. It is overall harmful and blinds one's perception of failing. Being overconfident keeps one from acknowledging loss, and thus does not create any secondary actions in case events go wrong. This includes retreating. When one is aware of their chances of losing, one can accurately weigh the consequences of continuing or quitting. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.204.130.21 (talk) 02:26, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Arrogance" and "Hubris" Mean Yourself

It would be good to point out words for being overconfident in other people or things, but arrogance and hubris don't work, those can only refer to the self.35.8.141.143 (talk) 20:43, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So what words would you suggest? Lova Falk talk 21:19, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What is this?!

This article is written like a blogpost. I highly recommend re-writing the entire thing. Best regards. Doctor Papa Jones • (Click here to collect your prize!) 09:27, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That's very helpful. Thanks. Natureium (talk) 15:48, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merge With Self-confidence

Do they differ in any measurable way, I would actually import this article into self-confidence and rename self-confidence just to confidence (which semantically is merging it into this, but practically is way easier the other way around).Ethanpet113 (talk) 08:00, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with a merge and rename just to confidence.