Jump to content

Talk:Wilderness therapy

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 68.59.180.151 (talk) at 22:16, 29 July 2009 (Needs editing or just some erasing.: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconMedicine C‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.
CThis article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Highly Biased Article

This article does NOT reflect the current thinking in the field. There is a lot of propaganda (especially the "controversy" section which fails to discuss that the linkage to "boot camps" is a media creation. The GAO report was highly biased. Dr adventure (talk) 05:27, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nice article!

Especially well referenced, good work! Sam Spade 15:44, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I actually went to two wilderness programs and know many people who have went to wilderness. Either the program has helped them, but they still misbehave or they are just plain pissed. I believe that this article is needs to be reevaluated for it's neutral point. --Bea 15:57, 4 September 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bbh123 (talkcontribs)

POV issues

I tagged the article with a POV template because much of the article appears designed not to convey information, but to tell people what to think. It does include sections written from different viewpoints, but the juxtaposition of different opinionated statements is not the same thing as objectivity. --Orlady (talk) 17:33, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Needs editing or just some erasing.

Someone has obviously had a bad experience with wilderness camps and wanted to show there disdain in this article. Some parts fail to be informative but provide advice and opinions. its obvious to see the different writers, one uses opinion and no facts, the other quotes the most well known wilderness therapy organization.