Talk:Landmark Education

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is a controversial topic that may be under dispute. Please read this page and discuss substantial changes here before making them. Make sure to supply full citations when adding information and consider tagging or removing uncited/unciteable information.

This is not a forum for general discussion of personal discussions about the subject. Any such messages will be deleted. Please limit discussion to improvement of the article.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Landmark Education article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

To-do list for Landmark Education:

edit · history · watch · refresh

Here are some tasks you can do: Requests: Add some images with detailed fair-use rationale, or if possible, some free images, to the article. Copyedit: Copyedit grammar, paraphrasing quotations where appropriate. Cleanup: Cleanup and format all citations as per Wikipedia:Citation templates. Expand: Expand and add to the article from the citations currently cited in the See Also and References sections. Update: Add information/expand from more recent citations in secondary sources, if known/available.

Discussions on this page may escalate into heated debate. Please try to keep a cool head when commenting here. See also: Wikipedia:Etiquette.

Please start new discussion topics at the bottom of the talk page per Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines. Thanks!

Archives

Jan 2004-16 Nov 2005 17 Nov 2005-16 Aug 2006 17 Nov 2005-16 Aug 2006 (2) Aug 2006-Oct 2006 Sep 2006-Oct 2006 Jan-19 2007-Jan-22 2007 Jan-22 2007-Mar-20 2007 March 2007 April 2007 May 2007 June 2007 July 2007 August 2007 September 2007 October 2007 November 2007 December 2007 January 2008 February 2008 March 2008 April 2008 May 2008

Contents 1 Disappearance of "Religious implications" views 2 Disappearance of ILP discussion 3 discusting vs. disgusting

[edit] Disappearance of "Religious implications" views

At 1918 hours on 2008-01-27 a Wikipedian removed an entire sub-section on "Religious implications", asserting in the edit-summary "Landmark is not a religion it is courses". Since a topic can have religious imnplications without necessarily becoming a religion, and since the section provided well-sourced citations expressing a variety of viewpoints, and in the light of discussions in February and March 2008 on this talk-page, lets restore this data, as follows: == Disappearance of religious discussion == At 1335 hours on [[2008-02-04]] a Wikipedian removed the section then headed "Religious implications" with the edit-summary "not religious". -- We don't know what the editor regarded as "not religious"; but since Wikipedia does not shy away from discussion of religious matters and as the deleted material contained referenced comments linking the activities of Landmark Education and religious views, we can restore this material -- as expressing views on Landmark Education -- for further elaboration and improvement. -- [[User:Pedant17|Pedant17]] ([[User talk:Pedant17|talk]]) 03:11, 24 May 2008 (UTC) == Disappearance of SELP discussion == At 1449 hours on [[2008-02-05]] a Wikipedian removed a paragraph on the SELP course reading: "<nowiki>Successful projects lead participants to be "candidated" to enter higher-level courses. To advance further to these higher programs (like the Introduction Leaders Program), many particpants whose projects did not raise funds or were not successful can take more courses at a lower level (called "reviewing"), enroll a certain number of new Landmark Forum paricipants, or volunteer more to become "candidated."" without providing an explanation in the edit-summary. Let's restore and develop this insight into Landmarkian leadership and curriculum-structure. -- Pedant17 (talk) 04:32, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't know how to corroborate, using something other than OR this but I did speak to someone I know involved with Landmark and this statement is false so I wouldn't restore it.Mvemkr (talk) 20:37, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Disappearance of ILP discussion

At 1450 hours on 2008-02-05 a Wikipedian removed a sentence on the ILP which read: "Only "candidated" Landmark graduates can take the Introduction Leaders Program." without providing any justification in an edit-summary. Let's restore and develop this insight into Landmarkian openness and curriculum-structure. -- Pedant17 (talk) 01:43, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

This is also apparently not the case, still no ref's for you unfortunately. I'll let you know if I do find something.Mvemkr (talk) 20:38, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

For "candidating", see http://www.forwardsteps.com.au/ (retrieved 2008-06-10) which lists under a "Personal Achievements" rubric "Landmark Education: Curriculum for Living TMLP both yrs & ILP (candidated)". Evidently a "candidating" process has existed at some point, though things may have changed since "Jan 18" (http://globalclearingcall.wikispaces.com/July+8,+2007?f=print, retrieved 2008-06-10). -- Pedant17 (talk) 02:11, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

I am sure there is a candidating process, from what I understand cadidtated is what they call people who are approved to lead their programs, not a requirement to take programs. Mvemkr (talk) 16:23, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] discusting vs. disgusting

I wrote in my last "edit comment" that Spacefarer's edit is "discusting". Sorry, I meant that his last edit was "disgusting". -- Stan _talk 20:59, 9 June 2008 (UTC)