|Nonviolent Communication has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.|
|Current status: Good article|
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Nonviolent Communication article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
|Archives: 1, 2, 3|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|This page was nominated for deletion on 21 April 2008. The result of the discussion was speedy keep.|
I nominated this article for Good Article status, and the review was finally undertaken. The main obstacle to achieving Good Article status appears to be that there is too much text tagged with "Citations Needed". All the work we have done on this article, especially as regards proper sourcing, suggests we really should not have text that someone feels needs citations.
So, I went through the article and looked at all the "Citations Needed" bits. I am not aware of any sources that support those bits, so I removed them. I don't think they are controversial statements, and I am happy for someone to replace these if they can find reliable sources. In any case, I do not feel these deletions compromise the quality of the article, so I am not concerned if they do not come back either.
I am excited that the vast amount of work people put in to this article, and the care and commitment to quality everyone showed, may be recognized. Good Article status would be a wonderful next step for this article to take. Whether the article achieves Good Article status or not, I would like to appreciate everyone who has contributed to this article and to the passionate discussions we have had on these talk pages.Michaplot (talk) 14:10, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
I did as you suggested and looked at both references, albeit, rather quickly, and it was not obvious that any plagiarism has occurred. I have several concerns:
- You seem to be posting from Cambridge University and thereabouts, but you have no user account on WP. You might want to create an account, and present your case, rather than doing it through anonymous IPs (assuming both changes on this issue, were the same person).
- I asked originally if you would be willing to discuss this issue here, rather than making obscure changes with scandalous claims and no explanation.
- Why not simply cite the Danielsen work, rather than accusing Kok of plagiarism, but leaving her citation intact? If you have a better source for this article, by all means add it to the article.
- Without a published source for the claim that Kok's reference is illegitimate, I am not sure it is appropriate for us to have your change on this page. Kok is a legitimate academic, and the source is reliable. If there is other information on the source, bring it forward.Michaplot (talk) 18:27, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
- Is there a citation/link available for the Gert Danielsen thesis? The revision history note by 22.214.171.124 claims the thesis is available online, but I have not been able to locate it. (I have found an essay by Danielsen which discusses NVC and HNT: "Meeting Human Needs, Preventing Violence: Applying Human Needs Theory to the Conflict in Sri Lanka" (2005), available at a number of sites including) Rhwentworth (talk) 07:42, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
Analyzing historical documents (up to the newspapers of today) with the help of NVC
It would be extremely interesting to analyze all historical documents of the past – including the newspapers of today – with regard to using violent terms and classifications, including exclusive static terms like „men“, „women“, „we Jews“, „we Germans“, „the Russians“, etc. etc. This would show how violent the languages were in the last 5000 years (as often alluded to by Marshall Rosenberg) – and hence how violence still persists today.
Does anybody know of such attempts by NVC-trainers or NVC-experts to analyze "history" (another violent term!) - or more precisely: historical documents - with the help of NVC? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:1205:C6A1:1290:D8EE:B5E:FFA8:7890 (talk) 16:15, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
Axiom #3: "All actions are attempts to meet needs" seems suspect. Especially when viewed in light of axiom #6 "humans enjoy giving"; i.e., it is possible to gift over the level of 'need' and to or beyond the level of 'want'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:644:8501:F6B0:4D3E:7A77:D737:6A0C (talk) 21:48, 26 May 2016 (UTC)