Talk:Status attainment

December 2018
This article needs major work. I’ll fix it when I have time. It’s written like a 13 year old High School student with political motives. The tone is non neutral, it makes politically motivated claims... this article reads more like an article from Buzzfeed or Huffington Post. Please stop messing with edits.

Untitled
Work has begun on the construction of a proper Status Attainment Article! Welcome to the talk page! --Rw649306 19:35, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I am afraid I had to revert your work. First, you removed the useful wikified lead and existed category and reference. Second, your text was too much essay like for what is supposed to be an encyclopedic article ("Doesn’t seem right does it? People can’t possibly think that the..."). Don't hesitate to rewrite and restore an updated article - but please pay attention to WP:MOS and WP:NOT (point 3: "Wikipedia is not a publisher of ersonal essays". PS. Again, I think much of your contribution is salvageable, and I hope you restore it after rewriting in a more acceptable (less personal) format.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 21:40, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I'm new here and I am not terribly sure how everything works yet. I will continue to revise this article, but it is a project for a class. I have to leave it up so my professor can check to make sure it is being revised and that it exists at all.--Rw649306 00:56, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Piotrus, can you fix it so it still has the useful wikified lead and existed category and reference? I will work on the text. Thanks, --Rw649306 01:00, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I will be happy to help you. You may want to check WP:SUP and WP:WPCC.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 01:54, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! Citations and references will be added this week. --Rw649306 02:21, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Great, you can read about how to cite on Wikipedia on WP:CITE.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 02:26, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

I added some cites to major papers concerning the relationship between status attainment and social networks. Many basic cites are missing, and there are a number of areas of current research that need to be mentioned, but I thought I would help keep the ball moving. --Htw3 02:50, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Guys in my group, this article is still written too much like a personal essay. Certain sections need to be reworded to sound more like an encyclopedia instead of an English paper.--Rw649306 17:27, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Good progress
I was just looking around-- and you guys have made a great deal of progress. It is good to see also that several folks are contributing in a number of areas of the article. --Htw3 18:31, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Current research
Your current research section still needs development-- you only have one study. It is a good one to chose because it brings a comparative framework to a topic that has mainly been studied in the US. However-- you need to find some of the other current work on status attainment. --Htw3 18:31, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

This article is still really bad
I feel like this article needs to be taken down and started from scratch. The editor who made it admitted that he did it for a class project, and it reads like an essay in Marxism. The tone is like nothing I've ever seen on Wikipedia and I fear this article is irredeemable. Chrisvacc (talk) 00:57, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * This article doesn't mention Marxism. Why does the article's tone need improvement? Jarble (talk) 13:04, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Notability
Is the subject even notable enough to justify keeping the article? The opening paragraph doesn't even properly define the concept. BlueBanana (talk) 18:05, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I've found thousands of articles on Google Scholar that mention this subject. Is it still not notable? Jarble (talk) 13:07, 11 April 2024 (UTC)