Talk:Job interview/Archives/2015

Mass content additions
Just done a major copy edit to newly added section on Applicant reactions. Reasons:
 * Much too long and therefore overbearing for article.
 * Essay style not appropriate for an encyclopaedia.
 * Condensed sections removing superflouous / repeating phrases.
 * Truncated repeatedly used citations.
 * Moved / incorporated section to more appropriate main section heading.

Having said all that it was interesting content which added a new facet to the article.Tmol42 (talk) 23:37, 1 May 2015 (UTC)


 * PS. Is this article part of a class Psch project somewhere as its been the subject of several such massive contributions over past week. If so can someone come here so there can be some concensus building on scope and topics before large chunks of content is added. very happy to help but WP etiquette guidelines does put an onus on editors to consider the impact of their editing on others.Tmol42 (talk) 23:37, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Have just reverted a newly added chunk of extra text to the 'Interview structure issues' section as both its academic styled and excessively detailed content and multilevel bullet point format are not apprporiate to the encyclopadic style required for Wikipedia. Happy to discuss here!Tmol42 (talk) 00:29, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Further mass content additions
Have just reverted a hugh addition relating to 'Weight discrimination' which was alreading catered for in the article. This was excessive in length and detail on a subject which is only of minor / WP:FRINGE relevance. I have requested the editor come here to discuss.

I will address another large addition on 'Personality' shortly when I have read it through again. see below.

Once again is there a class tutor / lecturer who has set the addition of all these sections by their students? If so please come here to explain objectives. I am trying to be as considerate as I can to all these first-time editors in explaining the problems but in the absence of any response here I will have no alternative to either reverse similar inappropriate additions or severly edit further if there is any content worthy of retaining. At the end of the day if it continues in this way I will have no alternative than to request a page semi-protect.

Welcome input from any other editors looking in. Tmol42 (talk) 19:45, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Personality additions
Just revewed two sections relating to pesonality (i) of the candidate (ii) of the interviewer. Unless a job interview involves an additional interviewer trainind in personality assessment the application of personality analysis where it is evaluated in recruitment is generally dealt with through psychometric questionnaires or the like. No doubt in controlled experiments and in rare cases in highly specialised recruitment programmes such examination might be conducted thriugh some form of interview technique but this is well-beyond the scope of this article.Tmol42 (talk) 20:01, 4 May 2015 (UTC)