Talk:Stephen Covey/Archives/2012

Omission

Unfortunately, the ideal in the "Purpose of the books" section has been ommitted from this article. --JFN 00:10, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Tone

This article reads like an advertisement overall, or lifts significantly from Franklin Covey press releases. Frogan 05:21, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Not any more.

I am deleting the entire "Critics" section for similar and obvious reasons. Although there are certainly criticisms of Mr. Covey that can be made, this entire section has the obvious tone of a personal rant. Quotation marks are used incorrectly, apparently to either disown trite expressions or quote one's personal opinions rather than cite statements published in reliable sources. Remember, Wikipedia is not intended for original research, and certainly not intended for original criticism that doesn't even resemble content from a legitimate source. The section as is contributes nothing of any quality to the article. Someone familiar with the subject please redo the section using references. Fbwls (talk) 06:52, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Awards

Could someone please supply the source of the awards listed? A claimed award like "Speaker of the Year in 1999" is useless if you don't know who awarded him that title. Or "The Sikh's 1998 International Man of Peace Award" - who awarded him that one; the entire Sikh religion? Or is there a magazine called "The Sikh"?Rosencomet 18:57, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Same-sex marriage

"Covey was also active in opposing same-sex marriage in Hawaii in the early 1990s citation needed." I removed the preceeding sentence from the "Criticism" section until a citation can be provided. It comes across as being potentially defamatory. --JFN 00:10, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

I reinserted the remark, with a citation. I'm still a fan of his work, but am disappointed to see he holds this position.

Septegram 22:58, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

I have no problem with the remark and citation, but I modified it to say who was doing the criticizing. As it was, it was just a statement of fact, but by placing it in the Criticism section, it was implying a certain POV. It would be like saying "Covey opposes abortion" in the Criticism section -- some would see that as a criticism, while others would see it as praiseworthy, depending on POV.

West81 18:58, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

It's from your point of view. Like steven covey i'm lds and am against same sex marriage i believe it is a sin. but You're entitled to you POV as well as i am

I am removing the "Debates on Covey's ideas and methodology" section due to its extreme brevity and resulting lack of contribution to the quality of the article. Enunciating Covey's opinion on gay-lesbian rights tells the reader nothing about his ideas and methodology relating to the work for which he is known; the section's title is quite misleading regarding its actual content. Moreover, the citation provided merely links to a nonexistent page on a website related to gay-lesbian rights. Regardless of one's personal stance on this particular issue, this section detracts significantly from the encyclopedic quality of the article. So unless someone can make a logical argument that we must specify the gay-lesbian rights stance of every person with a biographical page in Wikipedia, there is no reason to not delete the section. If someone has a meaningful contribution to make regarding criticism or debate on Covey's ideas and methodology, please do so. Fbwls (talk) 05:36, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

On 2012.07.16, Muncle11 changed the section heading "Opposition to same-sex marriage" to "Support for traditional marriage," with the rationale "In respect of the late Mr. Covey, his views should be represented in a factual rather than opinionated light." The guiding principle hereabouts is actually "Neutral Point of View, or NPOV, rather than deference to anyone's views, including Dr. Covey's. Since "traditional marriage" is nebulous and somewhat POV itself (to say the very least), and Muncle11 objects to "Opposition to same-sex marriage," I have updated the section heading to read "Support for heterosexual-only marriage." I think it's awkward, but it is undeniably NPOV.

*Septegram*Talk*Contributions* 05:21, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Mental illness

I added a {{Fact}} tag to the end of the sentence

Covey is also sometimes criticized for subdividing people into neat "proactive"
and "reactive" categories, sometimes to the point of equating appropriate
reactive qualities in someone's personality with mental illness

The first part of the sentence is reasonable, but I think the second has got to have a citation if we want to protect Wikipedia from lawsuits, and to comply with WP:BLP. In fact, per WP:BLP, I'm probably going to yank that latter piece pretty quickly if it doesn't get a citation. Not only is it potentially defamatory, but it smacks of POV (re: "appropriate reactive qualities") and/or original research.
*Septegram*Talk*Contributions* 15:21, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Single mother section

Could somebody please get rid of the refutation to the single-mother criticism? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.231.48.52 (talk) 01:23, 24 April 2007 (UTC).

SINGLE-MOTHER RANT

This needs to be removed. It screams of advertising and is very preachy. 198.49.126.74 02:47, 6 August 2007 (UTC)TranceNode

If you think it needs changing, please go right ahead and do so. That's how Wikipedia works. If you find the example offensive, please feel free to insert another.

I'm not sure what the criticism section might be advertising, or what it's preaching, but don't hesitate to improve the article.

*Septegram*Talk*Contributions* 13:52, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Aha. Later edit seems to have addressed these concerns.

*Septegram*Talk*Contributions* 13:57, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Personal life

This article is noticeably devoid of any personal life/biography. The man's obviously built upon his implicit reputation of a businessman and entrepreneur, though from this article it's tough to tell what he actually did in that field.69.169.163.44 (talk) 23:21, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Career

I was looking for information about his career. What did he do between 1932 and writing that book in 1989? 58.106.46.216 (talk) 05:31, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Controversy and cleanup tag

I have just started reading 7 Habits when someone advised me that he had a certain slant. So I looked it up on wikipedia and thought the article had some problems.

I was reading the 7 Habits of Highly Effective People and someone told me there was some controversy about the author. I do not think citing press releases is acceptable sourcing for his successes. I find it to violate the wikipedia standard on original research, and in general, not to be encyclopedic. I'm trying to do the right thing here.

I have no idea how to improve the article. To do so would require a bit of research on my own into peer-reviewed sources. What I was trying to do was flag it for cleanup so that it would be brought to someone's attention.

I added a cleanup tag (and an ad tag) but it was removed with the reason being that I should discuss it on the talk page, and boldly edit. So here I am. --24.158.0.2 (talk) 03:51, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

First of all, one would need to know what the controversy is. Then one would need some reliable sources. What I mean is that someone saying that there is a controversy about Covey is not a reason to place a clean-up tag on an article.

I've looked over the article and cannot see major problems with it. While it is true there is one press release, the other sources are reliable and fairly varied. I don't see problems with the way it is written, either. As I mentioned to you on my talk page, the article is rated "C" class, so it has a long way to go. Which is a bit different than saying that it "has problems." If you are motivated to work on improving the article, that's great. Contact me on my talk page if you need assistance. Sunray (talk) 00:17, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Missionary

If Covey really was a Mormon missionary in Ireland as a category hints, there are no sources and it is not mentioned in the article. It might have been a crucial moment in his development, or a silly rumor. Anyway, the article Latter-day Saint movement in Ireland says absolutely nothing about Stephen Covey and is not likely to say more in the future, unless Covey was very influential as a missionary, too. All in all, I recommend someone better versed in these matters would sum up his missionary work in a couple of sentences. That silly link from "See also" I'm going to remove myself. --Oop (talk) 13:26, 26 November 2012 (UTC)