Talk:Self-fulfilling prophecy/Archives/2017

Missing citations
It is great to use so much information, but certain sections have no research to verify their information. Without a source it is hard to determine if the information is unbiased and correctly relayed. In the sections about Russia and India non e of this information ties back to a source. Without sources these sections can easily be labeled as false information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BrebreT (talk • contribs) 03:33, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Lack of references and information
The majority of this article lacks citation, such as many of the paragraphs in the History of Concept and in the Literature, media, and the arts. Underneath the History of Concept, claims are made without the use of citations as well as the lack of references for quotes made. The text underneath this title needs to be completely supported as each subject and example provided requires a source. There is also the lack of evidence behind Robert K. Merton's accreditation as well as the "examples abound", "extensive evidence", and "famous example". No information is provided to clarify this. Many of the origin stories under Literature, media, and the arts also do not hold any citations as to how the stories connect with the topic. -T15311327 (talk) 20:13, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Lack of Cites, Irrelevant Info, and Direct Quotes
There are many different citations missing from different parts of the article.. It directly from different articles several times, for example the 1948. Doesn't have enough evidence to support the statement that self-fulfilling prophecy stems from Merton's theorem. Goes out of topic talking about economic theories and models. Give conclusion on how to break the prophecy cycle, but Wikipedia is about facts not how to's. Directly quotes from Karl Popper article. Goes way off topic giving too many examples(over presented) of where self fulfilling prophecies can be found in literature. The Canadian Hockey reference is irrelevant, and just confuses or distracts from giving facts of what a self fulfilling prophecy is.Ordoneznx (talk) 01:40, 20 February 2017 (UTC) would be good to include a citation in first paragraph regarding "Ancient Greece and ancient India..." Helenamcharles (talk) 00:33, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Lack of References and Information
Hello all, I was asked to critique this article for my class and these are my findings (as can also be found in my sandbox:     Looking at the references and citations, not every fact has been noted with a citation or reference; some lines explicitly saying that a citation is needed. Looking at the references themselves, many are older, with the latest reference coming from a book published in 2008. One source is from 1928 while a couple are missing publishing dates all together as well as links or other key information that would validate the quality of the source. The section with the least citations is "Applications". Most information given needs citations, there is wording such as "A famous..." and "...extensive evidence..." with no sources or examples to back such claims. One line of fact given, is cited incorrectly all together. In all, only three lines are cited in this section, two of which are books that lack links to retrieve verification and all three were published at 14 years ago or more. When reading the article, one thing that stood out were the number, placement and quality of examples. Even though there is an entire section devoted to stories that revolve around the Self-fulfilling Prophecy there is a long example given under "History". There is only one, poorly cited example under "Sports" and an vague and general example for "Stereotypes" involving politics that is only two lines long. The majority of the examples are under "Literature, media, and the arts". Most of these stories were very drawn out, repetitive and go into great detail about the story. There are a couple examples are not explained whatsoever.

Hopefully we can find a way to better the citations and examples used in this article and try to validate the information that has already been given. ChyTC (talk) 04:57, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

There are not enough references to each fact that are both reliable and relatable to the individual fact. For example, "In Canadian hockey, junior league players are selected based on skill, motor coordination, physical maturity, and other individual merit criteria." Where did this statistic come from and how reliable is it? Also, according to whom did the following take place? "Merton took the concept a step further and applied it to recent social phenomena." There needs to be clarification as to where this information came from. Where is this "extensive evidence"? "There is extensive evidence of "Interpersonal Expectation Effects" where the seemingly private expectations of individuals can predict the outcome of the world around them." There is a lack of information as to what the "extensive evidence" is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RachaelCalvin (talk • contribs) 01:00, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Good writing, however many facts did not have a proper reference or citation Helenamcharles (talk) 00:32, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Lack of Citations and Vague Information
There is a great lack of citations in the article. Some of the information provided came off as vague. For example, at one point in the article the author states "A famous example includes..." What is the famous example? Who came up with that example? I also found the sports section to be irrelevant. That section tends to somewhat throw off the article. In addition, there were other effects in psychology mentioned that have nothing to do with the article and some assertions were made at the end of each portion of the literature section. Melindaelena (talk) 07:14, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Irrelevant Information and Biased Writing
Some information provided does not fully support the main topic of the article. The examples provided under the "Literature, Media, and The Arts" are redundant and excessive which makes them irrelevant. The section "Sports" creates unbalance with the "Literature, Media, and The Arts" section because they differ on the amount of information provided; furthermore, the topic of the article is not being covered by the "Sports" paragraph, so the Sports section could be discarded or joined to the "Literature, Media, and Sports" section.

The article also contains biased narration and personal opinions. For example, the statement of "is very common" denotes a personal opinion without support or reference in the "Stereotype" section of the article. In general, the lack of references make the article seem less reliable. YherChu (talk) 20:01, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Self-fulfilling prophecy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160304090328/http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/story.html?id=78fc94dd-c0b2-4ade-891d-98770bfae388&k=70777 to http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/story.html?id=78fc94dd-c0b2-4ade-891d-98770bfae388&k=70777

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 03:14, 9 December 2017 (UTC)