Talk:Sex and Love Addicts Anonymous
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Notability
There are reliable sources discussing Sex and Love Addicts Anonymous. See [1], [2]. If someone could please rewrite the article using them, I would greatly appreciate it. If not I will get to it as soon as I can. — Craigtalbert 09:15, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] NPOV
The entire article is written based on the premise that sex and love addiction are real constructs. As noted on the sex addiction page there is no medical consensus sex addiction actually exists. Article should be modifed to reflect this. Perhaps something like "recovery of sex addiction" could be changed to "recovery of postulated sex addiction" or similar. — —The preceding unsigned comment was added by JamesStewart7 (talk • contribs) 03:27, 27 July 2007).
- The organization is based on the premise that sex and love addiction are real, and the article describes the organization. There is no POV issue. — Craigtalbert 03:52, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
- The article could be modified to better reflect the fact that these are the views of the organisation only eg first sentence could be "Sex and Love Addicts Anonymous (SLAA) is a Twelve Step program that aims to treat sex addiction and love addiction." Replacing "recovery from" with "aims to treat" makes it more clear that these goals reflect the beliefs of the organisation.JamesStewart7 04:04, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
- Most of the changes seem fine. I don't know why saying the SLAA book is used as standard literature is compromised by "weasel words." I'm going to remove that unless an explanation is posted. -- Craigtalbert 12:19, 27 July 2007 (UTC
- Please just state who approved the book for what purpose. If the SLAA approved it for use as opposed to some other ruling body just say that JamesStewart7 02:11, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
- I reworded it to make it a little clearer that it's approved by SLAA rather than some outside entity. — Craigtalbert 02:35, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
- Ok I'm fairly happy with that change and the POV of the article in general now. -- JamesStewart7 10:47, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
- I reworded it to make it a little clearer that it's approved by SLAA rather than some outside entity. — Craigtalbert 02:35, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
- Please just state who approved the book for what purpose. If the SLAA approved it for use as opposed to some other ruling body just say that JamesStewart7 02:11, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
- Most of the changes seem fine. I don't know why saying the SLAA book is used as standard literature is compromised by "weasel words." I'm going to remove that unless an explanation is posted. -- Craigtalbert 12:19, 27 July 2007 (UTC
- The article could be modified to better reflect the fact that these are the views of the organisation only eg first sentence could be "Sex and Love Addicts Anonymous (SLAA) is a Twelve Step program that aims to treat sex addiction and love addiction." Replacing "recovery from" with "aims to treat" makes it more clear that these goals reflect the beliefs of the organisation.JamesStewart7 04:04, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Restoring large portions of the article that were removed?
Large portions of the article were removed in 14 June 2007, without discussion here. I think the old version contained quite a lot of useful material. See See [3] for the 11 June 2007 version.
At Wikipedia we prefer to improve material over removing it. Is it okay to put it back? If not, which parts should not be restored?
Perhaps we can add a "Critism" or "Arguments against..." section to address the NPOV issue.
The problem with missing sources in the June version is solved in the current version.
193.10.114.153 (talk) 13:41, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
- The NPOV issue is resolved.
- The article, and many other twelve-step program articles, were deleted around June of 2007, for failing to meet notability requirements; they didn't cite reliable sources for the information in them. I rewrote this article and a lot of the articles on twelve-step programs after they were deleted using reliable sources. See the discussion Coelacan's talk page for details.
- I started the rewrite with the versions of the articles as they were before the deletion (I retrived them from answers.com which mirrors a lot of wikipedia articles). Any information you add back, you'll need to make sure it cites a reliable source -- as defined by wikipedia's guidelines. Wikipedia isn't about truth, it's about verifiability. -- Scarpy (talk) 22:02, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
