Talk:The Way to Happiness
|This page is not a forum for general discussion about The Way to Happiness distribution campaigns, or anything not directly related to improving the Wikipedia article. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about The Way to Happiness distribution campaigns, or anything not directly related to improving the Wikipedia article at the Reference desk, discuss relevant Wikipedia policy at the Village pump, or ask for help at the Help desk.|
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Way to Happiness article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
This article can’t make up its mind whether it concerns the book or the organization. Perhaps we should split it into one page about each. ―cobaltcigs 19:32, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
Article Generally Derogatory and Uninformative
The article starts with a neutral posture, then turns derogatory. It focuses on the connection between the book and Scientology. It transparently seeks to discourage an unbiased reading by suggesting Scientology jams it down the throats of mayors, etc, and imprints it with mayor photos/names without authorization. It fails to disclose or summarize content, which it could do within copyright constraints. It thereby fails to encourage an unbiased reader to make a personal evaluation of the merit of its content. It provides insufficient analysis of
- the content as to merit,
- reaction of readers to the content,
- impact of reading it on the behavior of the reader, and
- impact of reading it on the happiness of the reader.
I suggest reducing the negative verbiage about
- how proponents promote and distribute it,
- reaction of mayors to methods of promotion and distribution,
- imprinting of samples with mayor's names and photos for promo value, and
- the connection between Scientology and The Way To Happiness Foundation, particularly if the author of the article cannot show a connection of the precepts in the book to religious dogma.
I suggest increasing the neutral and unbiased verbiage such as
- examples of content (quote some phrases)
- summary of content (listing some or all of the 21 precepts)
- discussing broadly quantifiable good that has come from reading the book
- impressions as to merits of the book by the leaders of any schools, prisons, or other organizations in which participants/members have read the book,
- actual before-and-after crime or other behavior statistics in areas where people have read the book
- reactions of parents whose children have read the book, as to impact on child behavior — Preceding unsigned comment added by Flembok (talk • contribs) 16:50, 6 May 2012
- The connection between Scientology and The Way to Happiness is well documented in WP:RS. While I do agree that we could summarize the contents a bit better you should probably take a look at WP:NPOV which states what Wikipedia's neutrality policy is. In brief wikipedia asks that the content of an article reflects, in proportion, the views of the reliable sources available. This means that if 80% of the reliable sources ties this book in with scientology, while 20% tie it in with the Way to Happiness foundation then we don't offer a 50/50 distribution within the article, rather an 80/20 distribution.Coffeepusher (talk) 17:40, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
Readers have one central question regarding any book like this:
DOES IT BENEFIT MANKIND AND COMMUNITIES??
No one cares about the connection of the book to any organization if it does good and does not pervert the thinking of the reader.
The subject article paints the book as a PR stunt by and for Scientology. It virtually ignores content merit while it creates controversy in the mind of the reader about promotion method and promoter motive. I would excise the bulk of the negative content and focus on the actual content, the functional result of reading the book, and the merit of distributing it.
- actually based on the WP:RS a whole lot of people care about the connection as a PR stunt for Scientology. Do you have any secondary sources which discuss "the functional result of reading the book, and the merit of distributing it" or were you simply proposing that we rely on primary sources?Coffeepusher (talk) 21:08, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 9 October 2018
|This edit request has been answered. Set the |
- Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 18:03, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
Some police offices, particularly in Colombia, Mexico, Costa Rica, use The Way to Happiness pamphlets in trying to convince the suspected drug personalities to stop using illegal drugs and change their way of life. The Philippine National Police consider that using this booklet is successful approach resulting to decrease in the incidents of kidnapping and illegal drugs trade. Every police officer tasked to implement Oplan Tokhang encouraged the suspected users or pushers using the 21 moral precepts of The Way to Happiness. Andantov (talk) 17:51, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
- Paul De Guzman. "NCRPO ADAPTS THE WAY TO HAPPINESS TRAINS MORE POLICE ON DRUG ABUSE RESISTANCE EDUCATION". www.ncrpo.pnp.gov.ph. Retrieved 2018-10-09.