Talk:Child discipline

message: The article states: Non-violent child discipline has grown in popularity, but continues to be controversial for practical, moral, religious and legal reasons.. I am trying but failing how non-violent child discpline can be controversial for moral, religous and legal reasons. Please explain. Those reasons removed. Przepla 20:36, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Good points. MARussellPESE 22:12, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: comment with no heading

message: Added new sections just now to give some structure. Not attached to their names or organization, but hopefully will facilitate future work. MARussellPESE 22:12, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: New sections

message: There is clearly much overlap in subject matter between the two pages.  It looks to me like a case of content forking or POV forking.  I think a single more complete, more balanced article could be made by merging the two, instead of having two pages with different points of view on the same subject matter.  Also both pages need a lot of work;  it seems more efficient to combine them so the people who have time to devote to this can work together more effectively and build a good-quality page.  The Child discipline page is rather incomplete, for example representing only one religion.  --Coppertwig 02:37, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merger with [[Child discipline]] page 

message: I don't think it is fair (or accurate) to claim that "The Prince" is a primer on child-raising. For example, you can't execute one child as a warning to the rest and you can't hire mercenaries.
Also, Isn't there a single non-religious quote advocating corporal punishment of children. It doesn't take a theologian to say "Children can't be reasoned with" or "a parent should be like a benevolent dictator, able to discipline and nurture." Mike Reason
:Aside from conservative Christian James Dobson, probably not in the English speaking world these days. Ikzing (talk) 06:35, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Machiavelli's "The Nanny" 

message: I've suggested that this bring over text from "Non-violent child discipline". Even through it's non-violent it's still discipline! Help POV I think?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.190.112.2 (talk) 16:55, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger <del>Proposal</del> 

message: "Modeling is worthy of the efforts of every parent..." -- Worthy based on whose opinion? This is exactly wikipedia's problem. Neutrality is king when people disagree with you, but when people like what you're saying, you can be as biased as you want. --Buddy13 (talk) 21:21, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that the "worthy" clause is the only indication of biased POV in the section.  Removing the clause would restore a neutral point of view. I'm going to be bold here. A Pattern O (talk) 21:17, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

text: All right, that clause has now been removed.  Someone else can review the section, determine if NPOV is satisfied, and remove the tag. A Pattern O (talk) 21:19, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutral my heinie 

message: The article is littered with  tags. Obviously an editor has concerns with a lack of factual data - or possibly questioning the info because of a certain POV? -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 00:58, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I put them there. Sorry if I overdid it, but it seems to me that only the "corporal punishment" section of this article is balanced, with sources cited in support. All the rest of the article reads like a child-rearing manual, and moreover one written from a particular point of view. Just a whole series of tendentious assertions unsupported by any evidence at all. Alarics (talk) 06:46, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

text: Just a note on one citation. Dare to Discipline, by Dr. James Dobson, was originally published in 1971 by Tyndale House. Clayofco (talk) 22:39, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Citation tags

message: The current layout highlights discipline methods. I think it would be more useful to tackle the article from a historical or cultural perspective. It may be worthwhile to discuss the changes toward the treatment of children over time, in Biblical times ("Spare the rod..."), major philoshophical changes in attitudes, Asian, Middle eastern, Western discipline ideals, etc. Many of the method sections that are on there now could be summarised into a 'Current western methods' section. In addition, I'm sure Developmental psychology has been influential in changing discipline perspectives. Ikzing (talk) 20:30, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Fine. Would you like to do it? Alarics (talk) 20:57, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added a little history and restructured the page.  Not sure if this is the best way, but I think it works based on its current content. The biggest problem I see now is the Corporal Punishment section which needs more history and purpose and should be less POV. I'm also wondering if it wouldn't be better to have a section for school discipline rather than limiting it to corp punishment in the schools, to be able to get in things like the infamous dunce caps. Ikzing (talk) 18:13, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Now I look at the text again, I'm wondering why we are duplicating so much material here about corporal punishment which is all covered in a series of articles about that specific subject. -- Alarics (talk) 07:27, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible framework changes 

message: Positive parenting redirects here, but there is no useful text about that topic. Does anybody know what should be said? Rixs (talk) 13:25, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I should guess it was meant to refer to the section headed "Praise and rewards for good behavior". -- Alarics (talk) 16:09, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it's the title of a Parenting style, rather than simply a notion about being up-beat. I don't know what it actually means, but it shouldn't be a redirect page if it's just a simple phrase. Rixs (talk) 17:16, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Positive parenting used to redirect to Non-violent child discipline until I merged that page into this one. It not a parenting style as defined in that article... and a bit more complex than praise and rewards. However there are several books on the subject , but my guess each of these will have a slightly different defination. There are also a number of websites, but these may not be WP:RS Edgepedia (talk) 20:42, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

text: This looks like a WP:RS  Edgepedia (talk) 20:52, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

text: You're right, positive parenting is a significant topic these days. However 'Positive parenting' is just a phrase with no concrete definition. I reworked the page and added some more information about it. I still think there should be more of a discussion on the plethora of parenting books and advice, including Supernanny which is a bit of a phenomenon. Also I suggest a brief new section for School discipline, and not just corporal punishment: Paddling, Dunce cap, rulering (is that a proper term?), standing in the corner, detention, suspension, expulsion. Sudbury approach should probably be included in there. Ikzing (talk) 06:22, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  There is already a separate article called School punishment. I think the present article has been confined up to now to family/parental discipline, i.e. in the home. It might be better not to widen its scope to include school. In practice these are two quite different subjects in many ways. Better perhaps to improve the School punishment article and avoid unnecessary duplication. -- Alarics (talk) 10:31, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I hadn't seen that page, thanks. Agreed that they are somewhat different topics, and I don't want to duplicate any content. But the title Child discipline is all inclusive so there should at least be some sort of mention here. Schools are already mentioned in the corporal punishment section and the Sudbury section, so might be better to consolidate/summarize those with a Main article link pointing over there. Ikzing (talk) 11:00, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

text: I've made a number of other additions and changes, and have merged the concept of Positive Parenting into Non-punitive discipline. I'm starting to feel better about the usefulness of this page, though it still needs plenty of cleaning up. I was also hoping to move most of the school information to the other page, but it is named School punishment rather than School discipline so can't really include non-punitive discipline there. What disappoints me is that you can find a thorough biography of every Simpsons character on this site, but something as important as parenting is so neglected. -- Ikzing (talk) 04:02, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Positive parenting 

message: The new section "Internal discipline and popularly-based authority" by User:94.230.82.161 is good. Can you add some references to individual claims? Would you like to log in as a named user, to identify further changes --- Rixs (talk) 17:26, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Internal discipline and popularly-based authority 

message: Sadly the defination of bribe is wrong. Bribe is a money or favor granted for an illegal or unethical action. There fore-unless they are offering money to do somethign unethic- these rewards are not bribes by defination. They may be payment but bribe is the wrong word here and shows a bias in this page.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.124.231.211 (talk) 17:16, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Bribes

message: I just flagged the Non-punative discipline section as POV. The section seems very biased to me, with no substative opposing views or criticisms, which I know exist. The final two paragraphs seem especially condescending to opponents. I will edit the section to be more neutral once I dig out my old phil. of ed. articles. UnclaimedUsername (talk) 05:32, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I quite agree. It looks very POV to  me. -- Alarics (talk) 12:19, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV Non-punative discipline section 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Child discipline. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071014154404/http://www.nspcc.org.uk/helpandadvice/publications/leaflets/encouraging_pdf_wdf36202.pdf to http://www.nspcc.org.uk/HelpAndAdvice/Publications/Leaflets/encouraging_pdf_wdf36202.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:59, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: — Assignment last updated by Gishubtr (talk) 22:01, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Psychology of the Family