Talk:Anger/Archive 1

message: Hi people hi people hi people  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.82.45.240 (talk) 12:56, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've moved the religious stuff into a section "Religious perspective on anger", but the information inside that section still remains largely silly (inclusive terms, etc.). --huwr 06:50, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV

message: I'm suggesting  that we merge that article. It's only a stub authored by one person, and should really be redirecting here, mentioned as one of the more negative types of anger. Tyciol 13:32, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge [[irrational anger]] into anger?

message: Hi all, hope I'm doing this correct (first time joining a group discussion).  Anywho, I came across the "Anger" info which requested "clean-up".  I hope no one gets angry :) but I assisted in the "clean-up" effort based on established facts regarding anger.
1. Question was raised regarding whether to "redirect" or "consolidate" the "Anger" post with "Wrath" or something like "Extreme Anger".  Please consider:
Anger,
Wrath,
Extreme Anger (I think it was)
all have their separate areas.  One section including all or cross referencing would be great.  Because "anger" like anything else in life, whether the flu or love, comes in "degrees and measures".  Further, anger is a huge subject.
If I get a chance to return to wiki soon, I'll check in on the haps!  :D
Have a great day!
--Wikiwriters 03:08, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: ========

message: I don't know how I missed this, but apparently on October 8 User:Siobhan Hansa removed the section on Religious perspectives on anger saying, "The religious perspective on anger is not a NPOV".  I'd like to know how a sourced and referenced section comparing the treatment of anger in various religions is inherently point-of-view.  Admittedly, the removed section needed a great deal of improvement, but it wasn't POV.  
Moreover, recently, User:Hallenrm has added a section on Anger and spiritualism, which discusses Anger from a Buddhist perspective, and only a Buddhist perspective.  Digging deeper in the history it seems that at one time in the past the article was heavily Buddhist-influnenced, and the broader religious perspectives section was added to the article to try to balance the Buddhist views out with the views of other religions and to seperate religious views from psychological and other explanations of anger. 
I'm going to re-add the religious perspectives section that was removed, and try to cut the influence of the Buddhist material.  Lets discuss on the talk page before making major changes. ~ ONUnicorn (Talk / Contribs) 17:50, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Religious perspectives 

message: "
Anger is an emotional response to a grievance. The grievance may appear to be real or imagined, it may have its roots in a past, present experience or it may be in anticipation of a future event. Anger is invariably based on the perception of threat or a perceived threat due to a conflict, injustice, negligence, humiliation and betrayal among others.
"
This is mis-understood, because sadness is also "invariably based on the perception of threat", but you feel sadness only when you are helpless!
But anger you feel when you think that you have control of the threat!
"
Anger can be an active or a passive emotion. In case of "active" emotion the angry person "lashes out" verbally or physically at an intended target whether justified or not. When anger is a "passive" emotion it charactererized by silent sulking, passive-aggressive behavior (hostility) and tension.
"
Nothing of this is helpful, because it is a self-evident fact! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sun gazed (talk • contribs) 10:25, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  definition of anger? 

message: I noticed the list of emotions on this anger page is quite different from the emotions footer on the gratification entry. Certainly Wikipedia should be self-consistent (and defensibly accurate) in providing such a prominent list. I suggest we all refer to a referenced, consistent, and defensible list derived from: http://www.emotionalcompetency.com/recognizing.htm The list I suggest is: Anger, Anxiety, Compassion, Contempt, Disgust, Envy, Fear, Gratification, Gratitude, Guilt, Hope, Jealousy, Joy, Love, Pride, Relief, Remorse, Sadness, Shame, Surprise--Lbeaumont 18:12, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Getting the list of emotions consistent and correct

message: If you wach full mittle alch. This is the name fof 1 of the "Homunculi "
02:45, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  tdk jon 

message: Some IP keeps on replacing the page with this link. Let's try to get some info from there and add it here so he no longer feels as if it's his duty to remove our "unreliable information". I plan to. Yonatan talk 01:31, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Improve

message: What about hurt or anguish? Shouldn't they be added to the list on the right for "emotions"?
*Above comment unsigned, separate from comments below
Hurt and anguish are connected to sadness, IMHO. They may co-occur with anger, but almost any combination of emotions can co-occur. The discussion of what appears in the box on the side belongs in the Psychology Portal discussion page. DCDuring 17:30, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  What about hurt or anguish? 

message: The part I just wikified was quite interesting (physiological response to anger), but I would feel better if it has some good quality references. Abcdefghayden 10:33, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Wikification and suggestion

message: The lead needs to be rewritten to match the content of the article. I'm not sure if the current lead can be a separate section or whether it should be discarded and rewritten. DCDuring 17:30, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Lead does not match body of article

message: Is it possible that anger can be used as a great motivator for those who feel wronged? It might be used as a force to change for the better could it not? Albert Cheng 21:16, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can anger be used effectively? 

message: Substituted at 14:13, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment