Talk:Landmark Worldwide/Archive 25

Disappearance of accurate sourcing
At 1401 on 24 February 2008, Wikipedian replaced the reference for a quote (http://web.archive.org/web/20041129092957/www.landmarkeducation.com/display_content.jsp?top=21&mid=59&bottom=62  ) with a more volatile reference: http://www.landmarkforumsyllabus.com. In order to avoid linkrot, Wikipedia favors linking to archived pages -- see WP:DEADREF. The context of the overwritten link preserved the text and intention of the original quotation and provides a stable pont of reference rather than a risky connection to a questionable source. -- Pedant17 (talk) 02:06, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I would like to assist in editing this article from a neutral point of view and supplying non-controversial, third party sources. It looks like there has been quite a bit of back and forth, but maybe a quick summary of the key points that need work would be helpful. If I understand this correctly, there is quite a bit of controversy surrounding landmark and that would need to be carefully recorded and sourced. 85.179.68.122 (talk) 12:16, 20 July 2008 (UTC) diastar


 * Welcome! -- I see a basic issue here in that some editors regard Landmark Education primarily as a "business", whereas others have more interest in Landmark Education as a pop-cultural manifestation. Perhaps we could fork the article on these lines... Other issues include: what (if anything) distinguishes Landmark Education content and practices from Erhard Seminars Training content and practices? Why have so many sources on the history of Landmark Education disappeared from cyberspace? Who has the right to criticize any aspect of Landmark Education? Where does one obtain accurate statistics on the growth/decline of Landmark Education? Has the defensiveness of Landmark Education with regard to "the public conversation" become counter-productive? What constitutes a neutral point of view in discussing Landmark Education ? ... etc... -- Pedant17 (talk) 02:40, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Disappearance of material on courses
At 0206 on 2008-02-25, a Wikipedian removed the entire "Courses and Programs" section, commenting in the edit-summary: "Removed this section -- removes any hint of promotion and discussion about which courses belong". We thus lost valuable material and frameworks relating to areas that some people identify closely with Landmark Education. We also make doubtful the point of the Wikipedia re-direct of Landmark Forum to this page. Surely we have better ways of facing up to minor editorial controversy than by removing well-referenced discussion. Let's restore this information. -- Pedant17 (talk) 02:40, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Disappearance of Swedish office closure
At 0319 on 2008-02-26 a Wikipedian removed a sub-section on office closure in Sweden with the edit-summary: "dead link; not cited; shortening article; not important related to 52 offices now open". The relevant removed txt read:

Ceased operating in Sweden as of June 2004.

The dead link equates to the archived link: http://web.archive.org/web/20080201085148/http://www.analyskritik.press.se/irrationalism/irrationalism.htm of the source:

and to the text:

Landmark Education lägger ned verksamheten

(2004-06-08) Det suspekta amerikanska kursföretaget Landmark Education som ger kurser i "personlig utveckling", dvs. extatiska väckelsemöten blandat med "hjärntvätt", lägger ner verksamheten i Sverige efter den förtjänstfulla och kritiska granskning som bl.a. TV4 utfört. Sedan granskningen påbörjades har antalet deltagare sjunkit och därför lönar sig det inte längre med detta geschäft i Sverige.

[Translation: Landmark Education ceases operations. -- (2004-06-08) The suspect American seminar-enterprise Landmark Education, which gives courses in "personal development" (i.e. ecstatic emotional swings mixed with "brainwashing"), has ceased its operations in Sweden following comprehensive and critical investigation carried out by TV4 (amongst others). Since the beginning of the investigation the number of participants has reduced and accordingly carrying on business in Sweden became no longer profitable.]

Given the historical and ongoing interest in such matters -- and for the sake of comprehensive balance, I propose restoring and expanding the removed sub-section.

-- Pedant17 (talk) 02:15, 27 August 2008 (UTC)