Talk:Phil McGraw

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Biography / Sports and Games (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the sports and games work group.
 
WikiProject United States / Texas (Rated B-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Texas (marked as Low-importance).
 
WikiProject Psychology (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Television (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of television on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject College football (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject College football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of College football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Oklahoma (Rated B-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Oklahoma, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Oklahoma on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Wildly biased (which I have mixed feelings about)[edit]

I somewhat hesitate to say this because the truth is this article is interesting, I learned from it, and I have no reason to be a huge Dr. Phil fan myself. If anything I'd like to see him knocked down another peg. However, this article (as of 24 March 2011) barely even delves into the common perceptons of Dr. Phil, why he has become successful, his main accomplishments or a true outline of his advice. He clearly connects with a lot of people, and Amazon.com reviews for instance suggest that many people have found his advice helpful (others not so much). An alien from Mars who reads only Wikipedia might be forgiven for thinking that Dr. Phil will go down in history above Hitler but slightly below Bernard Madoff. Yes, the general perception of Dr. Phil by the Oprah multitudes has been too forgiving, so a more cynical take on him is fully appropriate. (Speaking of cynicism, it's hard not to speculate why the core of the Oprah demographic, the daytime TV watching housewives, might be overly embracing this stern father-figure-like dispenser of advice. "I said DO IT." OK, dad.) But this article is not very encyclopedic; it is basically a hit piece. Now having said that, while I think it would make sense for a Dr. Phil aficionado to come along and add some texture to this article, I actually hope that the Dr. Phil countersquad on Wikipedia does keep the juicy incriminating tidbits coming, because I think that's a legitimate and necessary role for Wikipedia to play. One of the truly invaluable services of this magnificent website. Although I'm sure there would have been more of a defense of Mister Phil (didn't he let his license expire?) if the page wasn't semi-protected, I shudder to think what vapid, impulsive defenses might have appeared by now if it wasn't. Albeit without Mr. Phil urging them to MAKE THE EDIT it's not entirely clear they would take the initiative themselves. And thus, another great irony of the man -- be assertive, because I COMMAND you to be! (Yes, sir.) On second thought, maybe we should keep the page as it is. If martians can find this site, I'm sure they are aware of Oprah's legions, or at least Mr. Phil's blog. One specific item I did wonder about though was the "Kalpoe lawsuit" as it only says the suit was filed in 2006. So I thought that perhaps it had been dismissed but not updated here. But I do see that a recent article on Daily Beast shows shows it's still going as of March 2011. Very much like his unctuous business ventures, Mr. Phil's lawsuits seem to accumulate far faster than they dissipate. "With three active lawsuits against Dr. Phil McGraw, Tricia Romano delves into the current and past scandals surrounding the controversial TV shrink." So, in short, all you wide eyed throngs of Mr. Phil adulators, come and be heard, don't make excuses, just step right up and do it darn it, cause I said so. (But all you other editors, please don't let them take over.) --96.228.102.110 (talk) 17:25, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

I think the problem is, that the reasons why he is popular are very hard to verify. Things like amazon.com reviews do not count as reliable sources, so unless we can find some academic that has investigated his popularity, we will have to stick simply stating his ratings figures and book sales. Ashmoo (talk) 08:34, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
I actually visited this talk page to suggest addition of some views on Dr. Phil's potential bias against men due to his audience. I feel that this is a very sensitive topic, and I, too, was unable to locate reliable sources to cite, probably due to the speculative nature of any such accusations. It would be excellent for an expert Wikipedia editor/researcher who is very interested/motivated to look into this, though.--Jackson Peebles (talk) 03:50, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Dr Phil will always be entitled to that designation because he has a PhD. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.98.21.55 (talk) 21:13, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Phil and "Lie" Detectors[edit]

Perhaps mention should be made of Phil's naive faith in the validity of so-called "lie detector" or polygraph tests. No one without a vested interest in polygraphy believes that they can reliable detect deception. Stress? Yes. Fear? Yes. Lies? Not in the least. Surely Phil has faced scrutiny for embracing this pseudoscience.172.190.235.115 (talk) 04:41, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Lede[edit]

{{Edit semi-protected}} The lede presently reads "Phillip Calvin McGraw (born September 1, 1950) best known as Dr. Phil, is an American television personality, author, psychologist, and the host of the television show Dr. Phil, which debuted in 2002". This should be changed to "Phillip Calvin McGraw (born September 1, 1950) best known as Dr. Phil, is an American television personality, author, former psychologist, and the host of the television show Dr. Phil, which debuted in 2002". "Psychologist" is a protected title, limited to licensed individuals and he is no longer licensed. 89.100.150.198 (talk) 20:13, 26 September 2011 (UTC) Yes check.svg Done  Chzz  ►  04:12, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

This has been discussed at length on this talk page, now in the archives. Please read the archives before fighting this battle again. The term "psychologist" is not limited to those with a license; just a term similar to "practicing psychologist" or "licensed psychologist". The Texas Board of Psychologists has no jurisdiction over Wikipedia, and their actions do not determine the content of Wikipedia; the editors of Wikipedia determine its content. Many academics without licenses are referred to as psychologists, without any violation of the law. One example among many is Albert Bandura. The article does not state that he practices as a psychologist. He has a Ph.D. in psychology, making him a psychologist. Cresix (talk) 02:23, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Wonder Woman[edit]

In the filmography section, Dr. Phil's cameo role from the unaired Wonder Woman pilot is missing. Shouldn't that be added? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.215.172.129 (talk) 11:04, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

I WAS LOOK AT YOUR SHOW TO DAY JULY 18,2013, AND YOUR WIFE SAID THAT THE FOSTER CARE IS BROKEN, I AM A FOSTER PARNT WE OPEN OUR DOOR TO THE CHILDREN WE LOVE THEM LIKE THEY ARE OUR CHILDREN THE COURTS IS BROKEN ,I GO TO COURT WITH ALL OF MY CHILDREN AND I CAN TELL YOU AND YOUR WIFE THEY DONT GIVE A DAME ABOUT THE CHILREN. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.202.34.236 (talk) 22:12, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

It is my understanding after reading the instructions at the top of this page that this is no place for discussion of one's opinion of the content of Dr. Phil's television show or his appearances on other shows. It is in that spirit that I believe the paragraph above (that is being improperly yelled at the Wikipedia community and that is barely literate) should be removed from this page. However, I certainly don't claim to know all of the rules here. It just seems inappropriate on several levels. MarydaleEd (talk) 14:39, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Article quality[edit]

Please forgive me if adding another section to this page is inappropriate. I just don't see a logical place to put what I am going to discuss, and I can easily see where there might be more discussion on this topic now that someone has brought it up.

First, I don't understand the priority levels that are assigned to these articles, as referenced in reports above. However, I think that since Dr. Phil is such a prominent figure in the realms of television, pop culture, late-night talk shows and the self-help community that the priority of this subject should be high.

Now to the reason I am writing today. This Dr. Phil article is so poorly written and includes many dead links (that were marked with alerts long ago; plenty of time for the author to have corrected them), and comments stated as fact but not cited by any reference, much less a credible reference, that I think an administrator or someone in greater authority than me should go through this with a fine-toothed comb and dump all elements that violate Wikipedia rules. I did correct much of the poor grammar, improper punctuation and capitalization, but those edits aren't as important as the abundance of opinion in this article or statements presented as fact that have no citations. This is the kind of article that perpetuates the unfair accusation that Wikipedia is an unreliable source for anything. MarydaleEd (talk) 15:04, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 April 2014[edit]

" could pursue and obtain a lifelong goal" >

" could pursue and reach a lifelong goal" 71.35.17.26 (talk) 04:58, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Not done: Changing that word adds no benefit to the reader. — {{U|Technical 13}} (tec) 11:26, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Not a psychologist[edit]

It is illegal to have the title of psychologist when you do not have current license. Why does this wiki page state he is a psychologist? It is illegal and misleading to the public. He is unlicensed to practice psychology and his TV show is meant to be for entertainment purposes only. Please correct this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.149.140.138 (talk) 13:44, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

I am not familiar with American law, but are you sure you are not thinking of 'psychiatrist'? Ashmoo (talk) 15:27, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Not to mention if he was openly breaking the law on nation television for over a decade he would have been sued or arrested by now.--67.68.22.129 (talk) 02:48, 12 August 2014 (UTC)