3,209
edits
Changes
MyWikiBiz, Author Your Legacy — Thursday May 02, 2024
Jump to navigationJump to searchDirectory:The Wikipedia Point of View/Hong Kong University Skeptics (view source)
Revision as of 08:01, 26 July 2008
, 08:01, 26 July 2008→One admin not quite so sure
Disturbing comment from WHK: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Neuro-linguistic_programming&diff=57471931&oldid=57461881]
Disturbing comment from WHK: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Neuro-linguistic_programming&diff=57471931&oldid=57461881]
== The 'Clean up' ==
From the beginning of June 2006 when the sceptics were banned, there were about 180 edits to the NLP article [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Neuro-linguistic_programming&offset=20060631&limit=200&action=history]. These were as follows
* 24 by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:ActionPotential (Scott Coleman, NLP practitioner)
* 8 by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Avb
* 35 by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Doc_Pato (NLP practitioner)
* 69 by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:FT2 (NLP practitioner)
* 8 by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:MonicaPignotti
* 14 by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Woohookitty (banning administrator).
Example edits:
* FT2 removes 'flagrant' POV [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Neuro-linguistic_programming&diff=57101773&oldid=57099047]. For example,
** he changes "Professors Sharpley, Druckman, and the National Research Council have criticised NLP ..." to "Due in part to its open-ended philosophy, NLP is criticised by some as pseudoscientific and for its manner of promotion, with some promoters using exaggerated claims. Professors Sharpley, Druckman, and the National Research Council have criticised NLP ...".
** he changes "NLP is based on [[New Age]] beliefs in unlimited potential" to "NLP's approach ''in part'' draws upon [[New Age]] beliefs in unlimited potential and also relies upon a strong observational basis. " [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Neuro-linguistic_programming&diff=57105134&oldid=57101773] [my emphasis]
* An edit by Doc Pato [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Neuro-linguistic_programming&offset=20060631&limit=200&action=history] described as a 'copyedit' removes this whole heavily referenced section:
** "Due in part to its open-ended philosophy, NLP is criticised by some as pseudoscientific and for its manner of promotion, with some promoters using exaggerated claims. Professors Sharpley, Druckman, and the National Research Council have criticised NLP in research reviews which conclude that its claims are unsupported and that it has failed to show its claimed efficacy in controlled studies [11][12][13]. Several reviews have characterized NLP as pseudoscientific and mass-marketed psychobabble[6][14]. NLP is identified by many scientists as charlatanry and fraudulent [15][16][17] as a dubious therapy and a cult [18][19] described by Winkin [20] and is promoted in the same mold as Dianetics and Scientology[11][13][14]. Beyerstein [21], Lilienfeld [13], and Eisner [19] express concern over the verification of certain aspects of NLP. On the other hand many credible bodies worldwide report both use and support of the field."
