Talk:INFP

message: A lot of the famous INFPs have never been identified by Keirsey but are taken from the site www.celebritytypes.com/infp.php (which is think is better than Keirsey, but hey.)
Furthermore, Keirsey and Jung/MBTI is not the same thing. It is misleading to show Keirsey's ideas on the main INFP page.
That makes it an apples to oranges comparison. 89.150.118.208 (talk) 01:22, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Furthermore, including film stars like Johnnie Depp or Audrey Hepburn on a list of perceived INFP's is a mockery of this system. By definition, INFP's avoid the limelight and they don't become stars. ᴳᴿᴲᴳᴼᴿᴵᴷ☺ᶤᶯᵈᶸᶩᶢᵉ 13:20, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Famous INFPs 

message: I just deleted the descriptions on all of these personality types.  A lot of them were copyvios from different sources, several of them being from http://www.geocities.com/lifexplore/ , where they may or may not have been copied from other locations.  Nonetheless, the three theories of MBTI, Keirsey Temperaments, and Socionics are quite different and require different descriptions of types, functions, relations, and other concepts.  Socionics especially differs from the other two.  The three theories should all be expanded upon in Wikipedia, but it is impossible to do this while there is a conglomeration of these three theories and they are treated as one and the same. Niffweed17, Destroyer of Chickens 01:01, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The new "INFP profile of common traits" is completely uncited. If someone doesn't provide a citation soon, I'm going to delete it (or at least the traits I can't find a source for). Some of them I have my doubts about. ThreeOfCups (talk) 20:34, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I reworded the "INFP profile of common traits" and changed the name to "Other descriptions." This section was a copyvio from Geocities.  This source cannot be considered reliable, however, the information in that section is generally consistent with other, reliable sources.  I see no need to remove it, but it should be better cited. ThreeOfCups (talk) 20:03, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Type Descriptions 

message: Why were the external links totally removed?  If you have a problem with the external links that are not INFP related, then they should be removed, otherwise talk it over before removing the other links, please. --66.32.51.99 15:32, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The external links were removed because they all said similar things, did not add to the article beyond what was already in it, and were mostly linkspam. Wikipedia is not a directory of links.  If you have a particular link or links you would like to discuss the merits of, feel free to do so. --Chuck Sirloin 15:51, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

text: then follow the guidelines for removing the external links.  Mark it as linkfarm and discuss it, don't arbitrarily delete please.--JHessick 14:45, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: External Links

message: I created templates for text that's the same across all 16 type articles to eliminate the hours of work it takes to update the same text 16 times. This is a recommended use for templates according to Wikipedia policy WM:TEMP. 
To edit the templates, follow the URL on the Edit page. Make sure that the changes you make to the templates are appropriate for all 16 type articles! (INFJ, ESTP, etc.) ThreeOfCups (talk) 23:18, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Templates 

message: The MBTI, Keirsey Temperament Sorter, and related Jung Typology assessments use the original spelling, Extraversion, rather than the modern corruption, Extroversion. In this context, Extraversion is jargon and should be thus spelled. ThreeOfCups (talk) 14:53, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spelling of Extraversion 

message: INFPs are creative idealists, guided by their own core values and beliefs. To an INFP, values are paramount; they show little concern for mundane practicality and social conformity, and are guided by their own idealism and sense of what is right. Typically unconventional, INFPs often develop an offbeat personal style and enjoy expressing themselves with creative pursuits like writing or art. INFPs want work that they find personally meaningful; although they are not often ambitious, they can become quite involved in projects that they believe in. INFPs are sensitive, caring and compassionate. They are deeply concerned with the personal growth of themselves and others. However, they can sometimes seem aloof; they tend to be independent, soft-spoken, and reserved, and prefer relationships where they feel a real connection. INFPs are typically flexible and accommodating, but will react strongly if they feel their values are being violated. http://www.personalitydesk.com/infp-type-description.php
Would that be a good idea to add this to the article? Twipley (talk) 22:14, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Twipley, I think the descriptions in the article are already sufficient. I assume you weren't suggesting inserting the above paragraph as-is, because that would be copyright infringement? Apologies if you already knew that, but I thought I'd point it out in case someone else comes along and inserts the paragraph without rewriting it first. Regards, Somno (talk) 03:41, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the goal for this article should be to eliminate the headings "Myers-Briggs description," "Keirsey description," and "Other descriptions," and simply include a single, coherent section that uses various sources and eliminates redundancy. The focus should be on improving the article, not simply adding as much information as possible.  So the answer to Twipley's question, I think, is to incorporate content that isn't already covered (reworded, of course). I do find a lot of the material quoted above somewhat generic, though; it doesn't really convey to me a true understanding of the INFP type. For example, INFPs are hardly unconventional, because they place so much value on harmony and on adhering to the practices agreed upon by their social group. Of all the P types, they're probably the most likely to be guided by convention. ThreeOfCups (talk) 05:14, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe unconventional, in creative accomplishments? I know Orwell and Huxley were pretty unconventional, and perhaps Shakespeare too. But hey, these are only case studies, no rigorous, systematic research whatsoever! Twipley (talk) 15:48, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point.  INFPs certainly wouldn't be held to convention in creative pursuits.  And they aren't opposed to changing the world, either, as long as the change comes through persuasion and consensus-building. ThreeOfCups (talk) 23:36, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

text:  INFPs conventional? Haha. Think James Joyce and his ouvre. The most conventional are the ISFJs. --201.241.42.244 (talk) 15:33, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extra description about the INFP 

message: For a discussion about the logo and border color, see Talk:Myers-Briggs Type Indicator#Remove or keep the fancy logos from the articles?. Please don't make a significant change to the logo or border color without discussing it there first. ThreeOfCups (talk) 19:25, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Logo and border color 

message: The other recreational pseudo-psychology systems Socionics and Enneagram of Personality have only a single article. In the meantime it would be beneficial to remove the "list of notable persons of this personality type" seeing as the Myers–Briggs_Type_Indicator is make-believe. 104.228.101.152 (talk) 02:07, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reduce to one article 

message: You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Myers–Briggs Type Indicator#Redirects and a new hatnote.  Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:17, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion at [[Talk:Myers–Briggs Type Indicator#Redirects and a new hatnote]]