Talk:Leadership: Difference between revisions
imported>Larry Sanger No edit summary |
imported>Subpagination Bot m (Add {{subpages}} and remove checklist (details)) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{subpages}} | |||
The article about leadership should not be about just one model of leadership such as the "Odyssey Leadership model." Perhaps a more appropriate title for this article would be [[Odyssey Leadership Model]]. --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 06:28, 4 February 2007 (CST) | The article about leadership should not be about just one model of leadership such as the "Odyssey Leadership model." Perhaps a more appropriate title for this article would be [[Odyssey Leadership Model]]. --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 06:28, 4 February 2007 (CST) | ||
Latest revision as of 06:17, 4 November 2007
The article about leadership should not be about just one model of leadership such as the "Odyssey Leadership model." Perhaps a more appropriate title for this article would be Odyssey Leadership Model. --Larry Sanger 06:28, 4 February 2007 (CST)
Any real leader would wince in pain at this dull, bureaucratic collection of business-school buzzwords. Sorry, but this article is just awful from beginning to end. It's worse than useless. Delete all and start again - in English. Richard Lamont 10:07, 4 February 2007 (CST)
- Hear! Hear! I've replaced this with something that can serve as a start. Ori Redler 02:28, 5 February 2007 (CST)
But see here, the gentleman who added the original article appears to be extremely knowledgeable about the topic, and whatever you may think about it, he did take the time to add the article. Politeness at a minimum requires that we reach out and express some appreciation for his involvement (I certainly do appreciate it), and ask him to write (for us) for a more general, but still educated, audience.
I think we can all agree that it would be terrible if CZ were to turn into the same sort of aggressively delete-happy project the way Wikipedia is. Granted, Wikipedia has a lot of dross to delete, and we will as well; but we will ultimately have more usable content if we make this place more inviting to really knowledgable folks. Thanks for listening --Larry Sanger 13:07, 5 February 2007 (CST)