Talk:Diversional therapy

Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Diversional therapy.

PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles)
The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine.
Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

POV Taag[edit]

I'm doing POV tag cleanup. Whenever an POV tag is placed, it is necessary to also post a message in the discussion section stating clearly why it is thought the article does not comply with POV guidelines, and suggestions for how to improve it. This permits discussion and consensus among editors. This is a drive-by tag, which is discouraged in WP, and it shall be removed. Future tags should have discussion posted as to why the tag was placed, and how the topic might be improved. Better yet, edit the topic yourself with the improvements. This statement is not a judgement of content, it is only a cleanup of frivolously and/or arbitrarily placed tags. No discussion, no tag.Jjdon (talk) 18:09, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

POV / Advertising material[edit]

I have re-added the POV tag to this article as it clearly has issues. It reads like it was written by individuals involved in the field of Diversional therapy, attempting to promote their cause. It also reads like an advertisement in sections. Some examples: "Diversional Therapy is not just about passing the time, about being entertainers or babysitters.", "Contact the universities you are interested in for more information as requirements may change." The "Benefits of Leisure" section could also benefit from being converted into paragraph format, rather than a list. Plebotron (talk) 01:50, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Article fails to define the "client"[edit]

This largely promotional article about a non-notable subject fails to convey any context regarding the history of the field, any related or allied fields, or why the field even exists. Is it a therapy for workaholics? Does such a therapy exist in any other countries? What are the benefits? Have the supposed benefits been studied by academics to determine whether they are real? Or persistent?

A nothingburger article like this seems to be promoting degree programs rather than any understanding of a novel type of "therapy". Needs to be PROD-ed, but I recently broke my arm and am one-handed and in a bit of discomfort. Thanks.-- Quisqualis (talk) 18:13, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]