Talk:Dynamic Tension

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Health and fitness, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of health and physical fitness related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Health and fitnessWikipedia:WikiProject Health and fitnessTemplate:WikiProject Health and fitnessHealth and fitness articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Bodybuilding (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bodybuilding, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.BodybuildingWikipedia:WikiProject BodybuildingTemplate:WikiProject BodybuildingBodybuilding articles

in popular culture

Dynamic Tension is referenced in the book Cat's Cradle by Kurt Vonnegut both of which are Big Deals and have their own pages. Should there be an in popular culture section with a link to those? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quixafizzle (talk • contribs) 01:30, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Diet

His attack on white bread was pretty radical for the 1920s. This may be true, but doesn't have much to do with dynamic tension. ^_^ --Starwed 21:51, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Actually it does as Charles Atlas included personality and health advice as part of his course which he claimed was more than as imple body building program.--Gary123 22:58, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This is not an article on his body building program, but on the specific type of excercise. As such the line about bread appears to be a non sequitur Also, check your punctuation... ^_^ --Starwed 16:23, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Charles Atlas and Successors

Charles Atlas, Ltd. ownes the trademarked name "Charles Atlas" and "Dynamic-Tension". Mr. Charles Roman coined the term "Dynamic-Tension", who was the former President of Charles Atlas, Ltd..

The exercises combined with Mr. Atlas's teachings and photos of him preforming the "Dynamic-Tension" exercises are what makes up "Dynamic-Tension". ````

Added Charles Atlas as a category since he is the reason for DT —Preceding unsigned comment added by Docclint (talk • contribs) 17:40, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Revert Warring

Docclint (talk contributions) and Pardoned (talk contributions); you appear to be engaged in a revert war. I'm getting tired of seeing this pop up every day or so, and would appreciate it if you two would knock it off. It's clear that you're not talking with one another, just deleting and re-adding and re-deleting and re-adding the same block of text, and never a word of explanation for either action. This is not constructive.

I recommend you discuss your differences here on the talk page before you make any further changes. Thank you. *Septegram*Talk*Contributions* 14:38, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pardoned is putting up false information. There is never a source for the material that the person is putting up and when you go to the link there is nothing there either as a source. Mr. Atlas never said the quote this person speaks about. In fact this person I do believe is out to discredit Mr. Atlas and his legacy. Mr. Atlas has been an inspiration to me and millions of others around the world. Please stop putting up false information Pardoned. Also please stop putting up false links and then this person reports me for putting on the offical Atlas website as well. It is sad. Then someone else should put up this link:

http://www.charlesatlas.com/about.html

This tells even more about Charles Atlas the man and the website has a number of articles which are great as well talking about Charles Atlas. There is also a lot of people putting up other Spam that has nothing to do with Dynamic Tension but is just trying to sell their product. This should be deemed as Spam as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Docclint (talk • contribs)

Be that as it may, Docclint, you and Pardoned still need to work out your differences here on the talk page, and not by revert warring. If you can't do that successfully, then there are other remedies available within the Wikipedia process.

I note that on 4 September, 2007, you removed my comments from this discussion. This is not permitted, and I will not take kindly to you repeating this. You may not like my remarks, but that does not give you the right to edit them from the talk page. Under some special circumstances, such as when you have another user's permission, you may edit that person's Talk Page comments. Let me make it quite clear that neither you nor anyone else has my permission to edit my Talk Page comments. Do not do it again.

*Septegram*Talk*Contributions* 18:33, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There was still no reference on the other page that was linked to so it was deleted. This person doesn't speak to anyone. You try talking to them and you will see they don't respond they just keep putting up these false quotes. The material on the site that is put up here is not even aligned to anyone or anything. They motive is to hurt the reputation of Charles Atlas and his company. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Docclint (talk • contribs)

I have been watching this and there is not any indication of any reference on the sandow site as to where this has come from that is correct. Knowing what I do about Charles Atlas and Dynamic Tension there are a lot of people trying to hurt that company. I am deleting any reference to the reference to that site as well as anything on Dynamic Strength as that is an attempt to sell a product. 14:53, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Until and unless the article on Dynamic Strength is deleted, it is appropriate for editors to cross-link related articles. Merely being a commercial product is not in and of itself justification to delete links. The only logical argument to delete the link from this article would be if it were unrelated to the topic and there were no possibility that a reader would want to learn more. We are here to write an encyclopedia, not to promote commercial aims. But neither must we shy away from all things commercial. Rossami (talk) 21:06, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spam

Although this article is interesting and has potential, I removed a fair amount of SPAM. I get the feeling that this article was created to promote the idea of "Dynamic Tension" and direct readers towards web sites which sell materials designed to teach this form of exercise. In addition, the article cites no sources whatsoever and is written somewhat in the style of ad copy. I think that some of the editors with an interest in this article should make an effort at becoming familiar with Wikipedia guidlines and policies such as those I have listed below:

71.63.18.205 04:02, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Origins of the method

A version of the paragraph below has been repeatedly added and deleted from the article. Neither the editors adding nor the editors deleting the paragraph are giving their reasons in the edit summaries. Rather than continue this low-grade edit war, I request that we all discuss its merits here. Lay out the pros and cons and then implement the consensus decision. By the way, I'm the one who added the "citation requested" tag. If the paragraph is kept, it's important to know the source. Thanks. Rossami (talk) 13:09, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Charles Atlas learned the exercises that were later called Dynamic Tension from Alois P Swoboda's course "Conscious Evolution". Atlas was later to say "Everything that I know I learned from AP Swoboda." ^{[Citation needed]}

user:Docclint's recent comment in the section above also asserts that this section is unsourced and unsourcable. Rossami (talk) 21:21, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As this edit war has gotten out of hand, I have taken the liberty to locate and add a reference sourcing the section of the article which reads: Charles Atlas learned the exercises that were later called Dynamic Tension from Alois P Swoboda's course "Conscious Evolution". Atlas was later to say "Everything that I know I learned from AP Swoboda." I hope this will be the end of this nonsense.71.63.18.205 00:52, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An update: After adding references to support the above quote, I discovered that the articles I used as references were actually referenced from Wikipedia. After trying to trace the quote back to its original source, I believe I found it on the Sandow Plus website. If you look at the history page, you will notice my repeated changing of references in an attempt to find a source which couldn't be traced back to Wikipedia.71.63.18.205 01:22, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This was no real source information. They made up that quote. Mr. Atlas never said that. The information is false. Again this information is totally false. Also the person that is putting this up is just out to try and hurt Charles Atlas. The material that is put up on this site by them is false. They just put that there without having true source information. The material that is posted on Wikipedia is by them and not by a third party. You will trace this back you will see what is going on is an attempt to hurt Mr. Atlas's reputation and his company. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Docclint (talk • contribs) 15:26, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is a very serious allegation. Do you have any proof of your claim that the external source cited make up the quote? Can you, for example, demonstrate that the quote was not on their site until after the Wikipedia version?
Remember that it is not Wikipedia's place to arbitrate right or wrong. Encyclopedias are, by definition, tertiary sources - we summarize what others have written on any given topic. If a fact has been published in a reliable source, we may generally rely on it. If there is published debate on a part of the topic, Wikipedia should neutrally cover the debate. If a popularly-accepted quote is untrue, we should provide the cited evidence to debunk it. What we may not do is remove content in an attempt to cover up a dispute. Rossami (talk) 16:34, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I found another source for the dispute pertaining to Charles Atlas having learned some of his methods from Swoboda here: http://www.trivia-library.com/b/biography-of-famous-body-builder-charles-atlas-part-1.htm. In this article it says, "He wrote away for the Swoboda Course and investigated Strongfortism. He became obsessed with strength." The bottom of the article says, "Reproduced with permission from "The People's Almanac" series of books. All rights reserved." This clearly indicates that the information comes from a source which is not out to harm the reputation of Charles Atlas. Why would anyone want to do that anyway? This is an Encyclopedia, not a forum for trashing icons. I restored the article.71.48.155.83 19:53, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is also an article here which states, "He used many of the powerful Isometric contractions taught by Aolis P. Swoboda, who released his Swoboda System in 1898. Atlas also used the methods of the great Earle Leiderman..." Docclint, I seriously doubt that anyone here is attempting to sabotage the reputation of Charles Atlas. He is GREATLY admired by many people in addition to yourself, including me. I think he likely took the works of those who came before him, then modified and improved upon them. This is a common practice and, by no means, detracts from the accomplishments of Mr. Atlas. The purpose of this article as well as all Wikipedia articles is to disseminate information, to contribute in a COOPERATIVE way. We mustn't let our emotions take over. To remove content from an article is vandalism and you have done this repeatedly with this article. As Rossami has already stated, "If a popularly-accepted quote is untrue, we should provide the cited evidence to debunk it. What we may not do is remove content in an attempt to cover up a dispute." Since you dissaprove of this content, I would suggest that you take Rossami's advice and find evidence to debunk it. Thus far, I have found none. If you find such evidence, then I think it goes without saying that it will be welcome and the content will be swiftly removed. Nobody wants misinformation within an article. Additionally, The Sandow Plus website is a TRIBUTE to Physical Culture and not only contains information about Swoboda, but also Atlas and many others. I also doubt very seriously that the people at Sandow Plus are out to make any of the men to whom they pay tribute look bad. This would be in direct opposition to their purpose.71.63.18.205 22:01, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have noticed this information after the post from before and the information that you quoted about Earle Leiderman is also not true. Mr. Atlas and Earle Leiderman were friends and Earle Leiderman asked Atlas to use his photos in Earle Leiderman's course to help him out as a friend. If you read the book "Yours in Perfect Manhood" that mentions this information as do other sources. Also the information about Swoboda in the book "The People's Almanac Presents the 20th Century" mentions this, but never says the quote that is being claimed on the Sandow site. In fact Mr. Atlas if you read a number of articles he wrote and articles about him they say he tried everything before he gave up on it all and created Dynamic Tension. This is also mentioned in the book "The People's Almanac Presents the 20th Century." Workout 15:08, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since we are saying that url's promoting a product should be ok as long as it applies to the subject then we should be ok with putting up the office Atlas websites which is what I did. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Docclint (talk • contribs) 16:08, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please Look at the A&E biography

The A&E biography of Charles Atlas has footage of him doing some of his Dynamic Tension exercises. His exercise regiment is, in fact, a combination of calisthenics and isometrics, but, that is, isometrics in which other muscles provide the resistance, meaning then, its not "true" isometrics. To avoid confusion, please reference that DVD or video.

206.63.78.78 (talk) 09:25, 9 February 2008 (UTC)stardingo747[reply]

Image?

I'm not sure would be a proper image for this article. It seems to call for a short animation or video to be illustrative in any way. --Ronz (talk) 17:57, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It reads like an ad

Not only does it read like a script for an infomercial, I read the entire thing and every source and still have no clue what it even is. 69.119.172.116 (talk) 04:33, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]