Talk:Brainwashing

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Brainwashing article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Psychology C‑class Mid‑importance

	Psychology portal 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.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Alternative Views C‑class High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative views, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of significant alternative views in every field, from the sciences to the humanities. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion.Alternative ViewsWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative ViewsTemplate:WikiProject Alternative ViewsAlternative Views articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Religion: New religious movements C‑class Mid‑importance

	Religion portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by New religious movements work group (assessed as High-importance).

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Law C‑class Mid‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

How would I go about including new information?

I'm considering this link: https://www.google.com/patents/US6238333, as I think it is relevant to this topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.193.139.2 (talk) 23:31, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mind control like to test the reaction of ur partner that u drive how it suppose to be I guess Montaliste smail (talk) 22:56, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Opening sentence and paragraph

I think the article needs a better opening sentence and paragraph, that doesn't rely so much on one source.BigJim707 (talk) 12:07, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mind control? Or Brainwashing?

Should the article be titled "Brainwashing"? That seems to be the name most commonly used over the years, even in the article itself. Redddogg (talk) 22:48, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 8 April 2017

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. (non-admin closure) TonyBallioni (talk) 14:01, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mind control → Brainwashing – This seems to be the most commonly used name for this topic. Even within the article itself and its sources. Redddogg (talk) 22:54, 8 April 2017 (UTC)--Relisting. Yashovardhan (talk) 12:36, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Seems like a much clearer name for the subject, "mind control" sounding more science fiction. --McGeddon (talk) 15:41, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose ~~Undecided~~. You are right that "brainwashing" is the more common term. However "mind control" seems to be considered a more dignified and more NPOV expression. Keeping the title keeps this article on the general topic of mind control, rather than on the 50s, 60s, and 70s "brainwashing" craze.BigJim707 (talk) 15:53, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Brainwashing now redirects to Mind Control. It should be the other way around. I would like to see the page broken into more specific subsections: 1950's vintage brainwashing is sufficiently dealt with, but the page does not adequately treat the Stockholm syndrome made famous by the Patricia Hearst incident; or so-called cult indoctrination and deprogramming; and what techniques they have in common ElijahBosley ^{(talk ☞)} 20:41, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's odd that Patricia Hearst is not mentioned. I will see what I can do when I have time.BigJim707 (talk) 20:54, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Her article is super-detailed and actually longer than this one. Not sure if one person's case would deserve a section here, but I will put in some kind of mention and link to her article.BigJim707 (talk) 04:52, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

For some reason I was not able to move the page. Maybe I was doing it wrong. Redddogg (talk) 23:33, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You have to wait 7 days.BigJim707 (talk) 08:55, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there's a consensus yet. I'm taking a break from WP. Will check back later.Redddogg (talk) 18:39, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm leaving the closing of this to people who understand the process better than I do. Also taking a break now, like I said.Redddogg (talk) 18:56, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. Common name of the concept as discussed in the article. There is a somewhat different concept of mind control in popular culture where mind control rays or magic spells effect this outcome without using any sort of technique, which could probably use its own article. bd2412 T 00:13, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Orwell and Tolkien

If you know the books please compare the Witch King's tirade against Eowen with the torture scenes from 1984. Ignore the LOTR movies please. BigJim707 (talk) 23:45, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]