Directory:The Wikipedia Point of View/Neurolinguistic programming - Revision history

Ockham: Redirecting to Neurolinguistic programming

2008-07-20T07:41:49Z

Redirecting to Neurolinguistic programming

Ockham: Tidy intro

2008-07-19T07:29:59Z

Tidy intro

Ockham: /* Neurolinguistic programming in Wikipedia */

2008-07-18T10:49:14Z

Neurolinguistic programming in Wikipedia

Ockham: /* NLP professionals promoting NLP on Wikipedia */

2008-07-18T10:46:52Z

NLP professionals promoting NLP on Wikipedia

Ockham at 10:44, 18 July 2008

2008-07-18T10:44:41Z

Ockham at 09:07, 18 July 2008

2008-07-18T09:07:20Z

Ockham at 09:04, 18 July 2008

2008-07-18T09:04:44Z

Ockham: /* Neurolinguistic programming in Wikipedia */

2008-07-17T18:13:08Z

Neurolinguistic programming in Wikipedia

Ockham: /* Neurolinguistic programming in Wikipedia */

2008-07-17T18:12:25Z

Neurolinguistic programming in Wikipedia

Ockham: /* Neurolinguistic programming in Wikipedia */

2008-07-17T18:10:42Z

Neurolinguistic programming in Wikipedia

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:41, 20 July 2008
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	'''Neurolinguistic Programming''' (NLP) began as an alternative school of psychotherapy in California, USA, during the mid-seventies. It was initiated by John Grinder, a linguistic professor, Richard Bandler, a mathematician (later a drug addict arrested for First degree murder in 1988), at the University of California at Santa Cruz (UCSC). It is now marketed as a powerful method or technique of personal development offering unlimited potential and rapid improvement in the way a person thinks, behaves or feels [http://www.nlp-now.co.uk/nlp-what.htm]. It is supposed to work by copying or "modelling" the behaviour and thinking styles of particularly effective and successful people in business, coaching, education, sales, therapy, sport, and personal development.	+	#REDIRECT [[Neurolinguistic programming]]
−
−	Detractors argue that it is a hotch–potch of theories, some of which are based on legitimate science, but which have no connection with NLP, others of which are completely unscientific, including hypnosis, psychotherapy and unconscious thinking, mixed up into a messy soup of new age thinking.
−
−	~~== NLP training ==~~
−
−	~~No university offers a course in NLP.~~
−
−	~~It is much favoured by trainers for its childish tricks for classroom courses.~~
−
−
−	* [http://uk.youtube.com/profile_videos?user=NLPacademy Videos of Michael Carroll], including [http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=6j3QAv1jWDE Close that sale] NLP style,
−	* [http://www.nlpacademy.co.uk NLP academy] website, see also [[Directory:The Wikipedia Point of View/NLP academy \| NLP academy]] in MWB.
−
−	~~== Scientific Research on NLP ==~~
−
−	The Principal Clinical Psychologist for Sheffield Health Authority, [[Directory:The Wikipedia Point of View/Michael Heap \| Dr Michael Heap]], looked at 70 papers on NLP, to examine its theoretical underpinning - Primary Representational System (PRS). This is the claim that we think in a specific mode: visual, auditory, kinaesthetic, olfactory or gustatory (first three being the most common). Thus NLP trainers would now diagnose me as olfactory, as keywords (predicates) are central to the theory, along with eye movements. The claim is that rapport can be enhanced using these techniques, therefore fooling people into doing what you want; working harder, buying your product etc.
−
−	Heap looked at the scientific literature and found that PRS is not serious science. He found that 'keywords' are not indicators in the way NLP practioners claim and ‘eye movement’ theories are, in particular, widely rejected. On ‘establishing rapport’, again Heap found that there was no scientfic evidence for the claim that these techniques improve rapport. In a famous study, Cody found that NLP therapists, using language matching, were actually rated as untrustworthy and ineffective. Heap concludes that NLP is “found to be lacking” and that “there is not, and never has been, any substance to the conjecture that people represent their world internally in a preferred mode which may be inferred from their choice of predicates and from their eye movements”.
−
−	~~David Platt, drawing from the German NLP research website http://www.nlp.de found that~~
−
−	~~1. There was no bona fide evidence to support the use of representational systems and concluded that they did not appear to play any significant role in communication.~~
−
−	~~2. Use of predicates had little to no influence in building or enhancing rapport.~~
−
−	~~3. Eye-accessing cues appeared to have no significant positive or negative impact when utilised in personal interactions.~~
−
−	Serious linguists will have nothing to do with the theory as its linguistic components were debunked long ago. Corballis says that "NLP is a thoroughly fake title, designed to give the impression of scientific respectability. NLP has little to do with neurology, linguistics, or even the respectable subdiscipline of neurolinguistics".
−
−	Beyerstein accuses NLP of being a total con, new-age fakery to be classed alongside scientology and astrology and many experts in management science are uncomfortable with its being mentioned alongside management theory. Sanghera, in the FT, described NLP as ‘pop-psychology’, ‘pseudoscience’ and ‘banal’. It has been called training’s ‘astrology’.
−
−
−	* Heap (1988, 1989)
−	* Krugman (1985)
−	* Corbalis (1999)
−	* Beyerstein (1990).
−
−	~~== Neurolinguistic programming in Wikipedia ==~~
−
−	~~The [~~[Directory:The Wikipedia Point of View/Neutral Point of View \| Neutral Point of View]] policy has clearly broken down in the case of NLP. Consider the NLP article as it was in Wikipedia on [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Neuro-linguistic_programming&oldid=33400304 31 December 2005], with the version of [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Neuro-linguistic_programming&oldid=182254945 as of 17 December 2007]. The 2005 version says that "Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) is a collection of self-help recommendations, promoted through the popular psychology and self development sections of bookshops, and advertised in various media including the Internet and infomercials.", and that "NLP has been criticized in reviews of research by scientists such as Heap (1988), Sharpley (1987), Lilienfeld (2003), and (Singer & Lalich 1999), which have found that Neuro-linguistic programming is scientifically unsupported and largely ineffective. " You will not find this in the introduction to the 2007 version.
−
−
−
−	Neurolinguistic programming receives probably more attention in Wikipedia than any other apparently scientific subject. The following articles were all started by, and mainly written by [[Directory:The Wikipedia Point of View/FT2 \| FT2]].
−
−	* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuro-linguistic_programming Neuro linguistic programming]
−	* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principles_of_NLP Principles of NLP]
−	* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_on_NLP Research on NLP]
−	* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/As-if_%28NLP%29 As-if (NLP)]
−	* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_and_negative_%28NLP%29 Positive and negative (NLP)]
−	* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anchoring_%28NLP%29 Anchoring]
−	* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapport_%28NLP%29 Rapport]
−	* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NLP_and_science NLP and science]
−	* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_neuro-linguistic_programming History of neuro linguistic programming]
−	* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representational_systems_and_submodalities_%28NLP%29 Representational_systems_and_submodalities (NLP)]
−	* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representational_systems_%28NLP%29 Representationalsystems (NLP)]
−	* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategy_%28NLP%29 Strategy (NLP)]
−	* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Well-formed_outcome Well formed outcome]
−	* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reframing_%28NLP%29 Reframing (NLP)]
−	* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milton_model Milton model]
−	* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worldview_and_working_model_of_neuro-linguistic_programming Worldview and working model of neuro linguistic programming]
−	* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modeling_%28NLP%29 Modeling (NLP)]
−
−	~~== NLP professionals promoting NLP on Wikipedia ==~~
−
−	[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ANeuro-linguistic_programming&diff=45015488&oldid=45000169 A post] by Wales containing advice on dealing with the NLP dispute. Jimbo is asking all to be friends (i.e. to acquiesce to the NLP companies’ sock/meats), when in fact the only thing that needs to happen is to slap a ban on the obvious NLP cult. Katefan0 was heavily involved and actually ditched WP during this episode.
−
−	Another admin called Woohookitty seems to have stayed, and rather bullied the skeptics off in favor of the NLP companies. However Woohookitty seems to have strongly criticized FT2 and the promoters [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ANeuro-linguistic_programming&diff=59414038&oldid=59409390 here ] and left in disgust a few days later (for the NLP companies to carry on the NLP whitewash). [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:FT2&diff=59622961&oldid=59534540 this] was the quote from WHK that FT2 used to support of the idea that it was the anti-NLP editors who drove her off.
−
−	~~http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Long_term_abuse/HeadleyDown#Other_notes~~
−
−	Action Potential, who seems to have changed his username from Comaze. He seems to have been promoting NLP all along, and surprise surprise, FT2 has consistently defended the COI NLP company’s promotion of NLP via WP.
−
−	~~http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Long_term_abuse/HeadleyDown#Examples~~
−
−	Comaze/Action Potential is a character called [Scott Coleman] who runs [http://www.comaze.com Comaze, a "Human Performance Technologies" company. He at the time edited a lot with an editor called GregA, probably an NLP trainer called Greg Alexander:
−
−	* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:GregA
−	* http://groups.google.com/group/NewCodeNLP/browse_thread/thread/d614f4cedad5e62f
−	* http://www.nlptrb.org/nlp/trainers/directory
−
−	~~Comaze also seems to have been working and recruiting together with an editor called Fainites:~~
−
−	* http://www.nlpconnections.com/members/comaze.html
−	* http://www.nlpconnections.com/members/fainites.html
−	* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Fainites
−
−	~~== References ==~~
−
−	* Donald Clarke "NLP – training’s shameful, fraudulent cult " [http://donaldclarkplanb.blogspot.com/2006_11_01_archive.html Archived here]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-'''Neurolinguistic Programming''' (NLP) began as an alternative school of psychotherapy in California, USA, during the mid-seventies. It was initiated by John Grinder, a linguistic professor, Richard Bandler, a mathematician (later a drug addict arrested for First degree murder in 1988), at the University of California at Santa Cruz (UCSC). It is now marketed as a powerful method or technique of personal development offering unlimited potential and rapid improvement in the way a person thinks, behaves or feels [http://www.nlp-now.co.uk/nlp-what.htm].  It is supposed to work by copying or "modelling" the behaviour and thinking styles of particularly effective and successful people in business, education, sales, therapy, sport, and personal development.
+'''Neurolinguistic Programming''' (NLP) began as an alternative school of psychotherapy in California, USA, during the mid-seventies. It was initiated by John Grinder, a linguistic professor, Richard Bandler, a mathematician (later a drug addict arrested for First degree murder in 1988), at the University of California at Santa Cruz (UCSC). It is now marketed as a powerful method or technique of personal development offering unlimited potential and rapid improvement in the way a person thinks, behaves or feels [http://www.nlp-now.co.uk/nlp-what.htm].  It is supposed to work by copying or "modelling" the behaviour and thinking styles of particularly effective and successful people in business, coaching, education, sales, therapy, sport, and personal development.
 Detractors argue that it is a hotch–potch of theories, some of which are based on legitimate science, but which have no connection with NLP, others of which are completely unscientific, including hypnosis, psychotherapy and unconscious thinking, mixed up into a messy soup of new age thinking.
 == NLP training ==

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:49, 18 July 2008
Line 44:		Line 44:
	== Neurolinguistic programming in Wikipedia ==		== Neurolinguistic programming in Wikipedia ==

−	~~Authorship of Wikipedia articles is governed by the~~ [[Directory:The Wikipedia Point of View/Neutral Point of View \| Neutral Point of View]] policy~~. This is a well-designed policy, and~~ in ~~theory it will work, so long as all those who understand it and can be bothered to put hard work into~~ the ~~article (experts, academics, researchers, professional scientists). But it clearly has not worked in certain areas~~. Consider the NLP article as it was in Wikipedia on [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Neuro-linguistic_programming&oldid=33400304 31 December 2005], with the version of [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Neuro-linguistic_programming&oldid=182254945 as of 17 December 2007]. The 2005 version says that "Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) is a collection of self-help recommendations, promoted through the popular psychology and self development sections of bookshops, and advertised in various media including the Internet and infomercials.", and that "NLP has been criticized in reviews of research by scientists such as Heap (1988), Sharpley (1987), Lilienfeld (2003), and (Singer & Lalich 1999), which have found that Neuro-linguistic programming is scientifically unsupported and largely ineffective. " You will not find this in the introduction to the 2007 version.	+	The [[Directory:The Wikipedia Point of View/Neutral Point of View \| Neutral Point of View]] policy has clearly broken down in the case of NLP. Consider the NLP article as it was in Wikipedia on [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Neuro-linguistic_programming&oldid=33400304 31 December 2005], with the version of [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Neuro-linguistic_programming&oldid=182254945 as of 17 December 2007]. The 2005 version says that "Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) is a collection of self-help recommendations, promoted through the popular psychology and self development sections of bookshops, and advertised in various media including the Internet and infomercials.", and that "NLP has been criticized in reviews of research by scientists such as Heap (1988), Sharpley (1987), Lilienfeld (2003), and (Singer & Lalich 1999), which have found that Neuro-linguistic programming is scientifically unsupported and largely ineffective. " You will not find this in the introduction to the 2007 version.

@@ Line 80: / Line 80: @@
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Long_term_abuse/HeadleyDown#Examples
-Comaze/Action Potential is a character called [Scott Coleman] who runs [Details Redacted]; name of a "Human Performance Technologies" company] He at the time edited a lot with an editor called GregA, who turns out to be a meat (Greg Alexander)
+Comaze/Action Potential is a character called [Scott Coleman] who runs [http://www.comaze.com Comaze, a "Human Performance Technologies" company. He at the time edited a lot with an editor called GregA, probably an NLP trainer called Greg Alexander:
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:GregA

@@ Line 67: / Line 67: @@
 * [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worldview_and_working_model_of_neuro-linguistic_programming Worldview and working model of neuro linguistic programming]
 * [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modeling_%28NLP%29  Modeling (NLP)]
 == References ==
 * Donald Clarke "NLP – training’s shameful, fraudulent cult " [http://donaldclarkplanb.blogspot.com/2006_11_01_archive.html Archived here]

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:04, 18 July 2008
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	'''Neurolinguistic Programming''' is a hotch–potch of theories, some of which are based on legitimate science, but which have no connection with NLP, others of which are completely unscientific, including hypnosis, psychotherapy and unconscious thinking, ~~all~~ mixed up ~~together~~ into a messy soup of new age thinking. ~~Its founders are Gregory Bateson, a now forgotten new-age sociologist, and his student, Richard Bandler (later drug addict and arrested for First degree murder in 1988) and John Grinder.~~	+	'''Neurolinguistic Programming''' (NLP) began as an alternative school of psychotherapy in California, USA, during the mid-seventies. It was initiated by John Grinder, a linguistic professor, Richard Bandler, a mathematician (later a drug addict arrested for First degree murder in 1988), at the University of California at Santa Cruz (UCSC). It is now marketed as a powerful method or technique of personal development that allows a person rapidly to improve the way they think, behave or feel [http://www.nlp-now.co.uk/nlp-what.htm]. It is supposed to work by copying or "modelling" the behaviour and thinking styles of particularly effective and successful people in business, education, sales, therapy, sport, and personal development.
		+
		+	Detractos argue that it is a hotch–potch of theories, some of which are based on legitimate science, but which have no connection with NLP, others of which are completely unscientific, including hypnosis, psychotherapy and unconscious thinking, mixed up into a messy soup of new age thinking.

	NLP is really a brand that sells the promise of unlimited potential by access to subconscious engrams, and body language cues derived from the observation of “therapeutic wizards”. For example, it claims to ‘model’ the behavioural characteristics observed in top performers in their subject (typically top performers in businesses and corporations) on the assumption that copying these 'behaviours' will lead to success in business. See e.g. [http://www.inspiritive.com.au/talent.htm here].		NLP is really a brand that sells the promise of unlimited potential by access to subconscious engrams, and body language cues derived from the observation of “therapeutic wizards”. For example, it claims to ‘model’ the behavioural characteristics observed in top performers in their subject (typically top performers in businesses and corporations) on the assumption that copying these 'behaviours' will lead to success in business. See e.g. [http://www.inspiritive.com.au/talent.htm here].

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:13, 17 July 2008
Line 43:		Line 43:
	== Neurolinguistic programming in Wikipedia ==		== Neurolinguistic programming in Wikipedia ==

−	Authorship of Wikipedia articles is governed by the [[Directory:The Wikipedia Point of View/Neutral Point of View Neutral Point of View]] policy. This is a well-designed policy, and in theory it will work, so long as all those who understand it and can be bothered to put hard work into the article (experts, academics, researchers, professional scientists). But it clearly has not worked in certain areas. Consider the NLP article as it was in Wikipedia on [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Neuro-linguistic_programming&oldid=33400304 31 December 2005], with the version of [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Neuro-linguistic_programming&oldid=182254945 as of 17 December 2007]. The 2005 version says that "Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) is a collection of self-help recommendations, promoted through the popular psychology and self development sections of bookshops, and advertised in various media including the Internet and infomercials.", and that "NLP has been criticized in reviews of research by scientists such as Heap (1988), Sharpley (1987), Lilienfeld (2003), and (Singer & Lalich 1999), which have found that Neuro-linguistic programming is scientifically unsupported and largely ineffective. " You will not find this in the introduction to the 2007 version.	+	Authorship of Wikipedia articles is governed by the [[Directory:The Wikipedia Point of View/Neutral Point of View \| Neutral Point of View]] policy. This is a well-designed policy, and in theory it will work, so long as all those who understand it and can be bothered to put hard work into the article (experts, academics, researchers, professional scientists). But it clearly has not worked in certain areas. Consider the NLP article as it was in Wikipedia on [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Neuro-linguistic_programming&oldid=33400304 31 December 2005], with the version of [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Neuro-linguistic_programming&oldid=182254945 as of 17 December 2007]. The 2005 version says that "Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) is a collection of self-help recommendations, promoted through the popular psychology and self development sections of bookshops, and advertised in various media including the Internet and infomercials.", and that "NLP has been criticized in reviews of research by scientists such as Heap (1988), Sharpley (1987), Lilienfeld (2003), and (Singer & Lalich 1999), which have found that Neuro-linguistic programming is scientifically unsupported and largely ineffective. " You will not find this in the introduction to the 2007 version.

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:12, 17 July 2008
Line 43:		Line 43:
	== Neurolinguistic programming in Wikipedia ==		== Neurolinguistic programming in Wikipedia ==

−	~~Pretty much any subject you search Google for – let's say 'Neurolinguistic programming', the article about it in~~ Wikipedia ~~comes first in~~ the ~~ranking. That makes~~ Wikipedia ~~an attractive target for determined groups~~ of ~~individuals who want to present their idea or product in a global market, free~~ of ~~charge. Join the encylopedia that anyone can edit, write an article about, let's say, 'Neurolinguistic programming', and you have as much free advertising as you want.~~	+	Authorship of Wikipedia articles is governed by the [[Directory:The Wikipedia Point of View/Neutral Point of View Neutral Point of View]] policy. This is a well-designed policy, and in theory it will work, so long as all those who understand it and can be bothered to put hard work into the article (experts, academics, researchers, professional scientists). But it clearly has not worked in certain areas. Consider the NLP article as it was in Wikipedia on [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Neuro-linguistic_programming&oldid=33400304 31 December 2005], with the version of [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Neuro-linguistic_programming&oldid=182254945 as of 17 December 2007]. The 2005 version says that "Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) is a collection of self-help recommendations, promoted through the popular psychology and self development sections of bookshops, and advertised in various media including the Internet and infomercials.", and that "NLP has been criticized in reviews of research by scientists such as Heap (1988), Sharpley (1987), Lilienfeld (2003), and (Singer & Lalich 1999), which have found that Neuro-linguistic programming is scientifically unsupported and largely ineffective. " You will not find this in the introduction to the 2007 version.
−
−	~~Wikipedia has a '~~Neutral Point of View' policy, and the theory is that any overtly biased article on NLP, crystal healing, or whatever, will be overwritten by someone else who will come along and edit the article to a more 'neutral point of view'. The great weapon in the neutralist's arsenal is the NPOV policy ~~itself~~. This tells you it is not what you believe to be true that is important – not even if you know it to be true, in the philosopher's justified true belief sense. What is important is that what you say is verifiable. He, or she who can cite reputable, authoritative peer-reviewed research against what
−
−	~~NPOV~~ is a well-designed policy, and in theory it will work, so long as all those who understand it and can be bothered to put hard work into the article (experts, academics, researchers, professional scientists). But it clearly has not worked in certain areas. Consider the NLP article as it was in Wikipedia on [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Neuro-linguistic_programming&oldid=33400304 31 December 2005], with the version of [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Neuro-linguistic_programming&oldid=182254945 as of 17 December 2007]. The 2005 version says that "Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) is a collection of self-help recommendations, promoted through the popular psychology and self development sections of bookshops, and advertised in various media including the Internet and infomercials.", and that "NLP has been criticized in reviews of research by scientists such as Heap (1988), Sharpley (1987), Lilienfeld (2003), and (Singer & Lalich 1999), which have found that Neuro-linguistic programming is scientifically unsupported and largely ineffective. " You will not find this in the introduction to the 2007 version.

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:10, 17 July 2008
Line 47:		Line 47:
	Wikipedia has a 'Neutral Point of View' policy, and the theory is that any overtly biased article on NLP, crystal healing, or whatever, will be overwritten by someone else who will come along and edit the article to a more 'neutral point of view'. The great weapon in the neutralist's arsenal is the NPOV policy itself. This tells you it is not what you believe to be true that is important – not even if you know it to be true, in the philosopher's justified true belief sense. What is important is that what you say is verifiable. He, or she who can cite reputable, authoritative peer-reviewed research against what		Wikipedia has a 'Neutral Point of View' policy, and the theory is that any overtly biased article on NLP, crystal healing, or whatever, will be overwritten by someone else who will come along and edit the article to a more 'neutral point of view'. The great weapon in the neutralist's arsenal is the NPOV policy itself. This tells you it is not what you believe to be true that is important – not even if you know it to be true, in the philosopher's justified true belief sense. What is important is that what you say is verifiable. He, or she who can cite reputable, authoritative peer-reviewed research against what

−	NPOV is a well-designed policy, and in theory it will work, so long as all those who understand it and can be bothered to ~~apply it turn up to edit~~ the article (experts, academics, researchers, professional scientists). But it clearly has not worked in certain areas. Consider the NLP article as it was in Wikipedia on [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Neuro-linguistic_programming&oldid=33400304 31 December 2005], with the version of [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Neuro-linguistic_programming&oldid=182254945 as of 17 December 2007]. The 2005 version says that "Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) is a collection of self-help recommendations, promoted through the popular psychology and self development sections of bookshops, and advertised in various media including the Internet and infomercials.", and that "NLP has been criticized in reviews of research by scientists such as Heap (1988), Sharpley (1987), Lilienfeld (2003), and (Singer & Lalich 1999), which have found that Neuro-linguistic programming is scientifically unsupported and largely ineffective. " You will not find this in the introduction to the 2007 version.	+	NPOV is a well-designed policy, and in theory it will work, so long as all those who understand it and can be bothered to put hard work into the article (experts, academics, researchers, professional scientists). But it clearly has not worked in certain areas. Consider the NLP article as it was in Wikipedia on [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Neuro-linguistic_programming&oldid=33400304 31 December 2005], with the version of [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Neuro-linguistic_programming&oldid=182254945 as of 17 December 2007]. The 2005 version says that "Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) is a collection of self-help recommendations, promoted through the popular psychology and self development sections of bookshops, and advertised in various media including the Internet and infomercials.", and that "NLP has been criticized in reviews of research by scientists such as Heap (1988), Sharpley (1987), Lilienfeld (2003), and (Singer & Lalich 1999), which have found that Neuro-linguistic programming is scientifically unsupported and largely ineffective. " You will not find this in the introduction to the 2007 version.