Misplaced Pages

To non-promotional NLP editors

Hello non nlp promotional editors. Progress has been good as regards mediation and they will continue to improve as long as we all stay cool.

• Since the article has been well covered and cited, and those citations have been verified multiple times even in mediation, it is time to accept the facts. The mediation requests have been satisfied as regards citations, and there are clearly more to come that can satisfy them further. However, it is clear that some NLP promoters are using whatever tactic they can to antagonize even after statements from the mediator, they try to make it appear that questions have not been answered, to add hyperbole and jargon, and generally confuse conclusive scientific findings by adding minor single and irrelevant speculative NLP studies. They also seem to be attempting to break the 100Kilobite barrier on file size.

• The solution is to stay cool, take a harder scientific line (exclude single minor speculative studies) and do not stand for any self-desctructive NLPpromotional nonsense. NLP is about neuro, linguistics (neurolinguistics) and programming. It uses scientific sounding jargon and misplaced concepts in a confusing way, and therefore must be clarified using scientific studies, neurology, psychology and other reliable and neutral sources.

• The solid evidence presented has indeed been covered in the archives multiple times. If an NLP promoter insists that they have not had their question answered when it has been covered before, simply stay cool and refer them to the archives.

• If an NLP promoter insists that the scientific studies are wrong, or that science is wrong in general, then they are using a pseudoscientific argument, and can be directed to the archives.

• If an NLP promoter makes multiple edits in order to make editing harder then simply revert. If it is convenient, try not to delete any valid edits in the process, but if it is not convenient, simply revert the lot.

• Do your best to help the mediator as NLP is deliberately very confusing. Provide help with seperating obscurantist jargon from real neurology or psychology, and help with the identification of hype and pseudoscientific argument and NLP excuses.

• Considering the rigor of the present article (though the 2000 section still needs checking and making concise) it is clear that further NPOV clarifying and brevifying can occur. Best regards JPLogan 04:25, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Arbitration accepted

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Neuro-linguistic programming has been accepted. Please place evidence at Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Neuro-linguistic programming/Evidence. Proposals and comments may be made at Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Neuro-linguistic programming/Workshop. Fred Bauder 02:52, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Final decision

The arbitration committee has reached a final decision in the Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Neuro-linguistic programming case. Raul654 01:49, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

JP would you add to the "what this article needs list"

Would you add your wants for the article to be finished here In order to make sure everyone gets what they want I am just trying to keep track of it. jVirus 09:45, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Refactored comment

Hi -- I have refactored a portion of your most recent remarks on NLP that I found needlessly baiting and antagonistic. Please think your comments over a little more carefully next time. · Katefan0/poll 04:11, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

So you are saying we need to behave unlike most other wikipedia editors? JPLogan 01:50, 15 February 2006 (UTC)