Talk:I'm OK – You're OK

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the I'm OK – You're OK article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

Psychology Low‑importance

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology 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.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Transactional analysis#Ways of time structuring|structure time]] The anchor (#Ways of time structuring) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

OR in the Criticisms section

Ripped out quite a lot of OR rubbish from the criticsms section. ElectricRay (talk) 13:27, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

themes

I'm proposing to add a section describing the major themes to this book, and removing (for now) the elements of the current article that seem to make unsubstantiated POV judgements - any objections or anyone else working on this at the moment? Infilms (talk) 09:19, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK I'm done adding new material. I invite other editors who know this subject to improve this article further. Hugh Mason (talk • contribs 20:37, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't a person be referred to by his or her last name, as in Penfield for Wilder Penfield?

The subject line says it all. Just wondering why the author used the first name, Wilder, to refer to the neurosurgeon? (69.155.140.190 (talk) 05:27, 21 February 2012 (UTC))[reply]

POV issues

There's a clear "positive" bias in the language of this article, especially in the lead, and that's even allowing for the Criticism section. I've added CN for a couple of the more blatant examples (in the lead), but the whole thing could do with a clean up towards a more neutral tone. Thomask0 (talk) 03:09, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]