Talk:Superficial charm/Archives/2012

Superficial charm and splitting (psychology)

I read somewhere that superficial charm amongst narcissists and psychopaths is a facet of splitting (psychology) (black and white thinking). Typical scenario is that psycho piles on the superficial charm in early encounters but later switches into monster mode in later encounters. I'll put something about this in here if i can find a decent ref about this. --Penbat (talk) 16:40, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Delete?

I won't nominate it, because someone thought it worthy of including in the psychology project, but I cannot see any encyclopedic content here. But I do believe it's worthy of deletion. DavidOaks (talk) 02:43, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Imo it is a highly important topic. it had an afd a few weeks ago and it had a resounding keep vote of about 6 to 1. The arguments were thrashed out then. So attempting to delete this is a pointless avenue. It is still a stub and there is quite a lot of potential expansion to come.--Penbat (talk) 07:53, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

On what basis is it highly important or has great potential? I did a google scholar search on the phrase -- it gets 1530 hits. I only bothered with the first three pages, where the phrase was used, without discussion or analysis, in lists of traits in various personality disorders. No evidence it's an analytic category, any more than "quick to smile" is. As I said, I won't argue with a closed AfD, but I don't see the possibilities you do for moving this past sub-stub. DavidOaks (talk) 17:41, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

I cant be assed to repeat the afd arguments again and you are obviously a guy who just doesnt "get it" and it probably would be futile trying to explain it to you anyway.--Penbat (talk) 17:54, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

incidentally quit ripping into this article when about 30% of psychology articles dont even have a single citation.--Penbat (talk) 17:57, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

I looked, found them unconvincing assertions. Since it passed AfD (although it should not have) I am trying to get the very thin material here at least in line with minimal expectations and policy. "It will get better someday" is not a rationale for not editing, or for reverting the edits of others. "Other articles on similar subjects are even worse" isn't persuasive either. Sounds like those articles also need trimming -- not defending. Do have a careful look at WP:OWN. This article has the same status as the phrase "web of narcissism" which also appears, without a definition distinguishing it from common usage, in many psych articles.DavidOaks (talk) 20:56, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

(outdent) This is headed towards an edit war; the phrase "glib and superficial charm" seems to be the locus classicus, and is well-sourced. I do believe the article is at its core hopelessly unencyclopedic; when we strip away (as we must and shall, soon) all the uncited generalities that prove nothing more than that the phrase is in general circulation, and sort of describes crummy behavior including dishonest salespeople, cheating lovers and reptilian co-workers, we find that the precise formulation has no real diagnostic significance. It's as if there were a Wikiproject on posture and we created an article titled Upright but comfortable. Meanwhile, accusing others of lacking expertise required to edit (how would anyone know that?) is specifically diagnostic of issues with WP:Own. DavidOaks (talk) 19:51, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

I think that the subject of superficial charm is notable, but as it stands, there's not enough to warrant its own article. It should either be expanded (given that there's enough material on it) or else made a subsection in the article on Charisma. --Xagg (talk) 19:29, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

It is a mistake to confuse charisma with charm. Charisma is an innate personality attribute while superficial charm is a key type of manipulative behaviour. Superficial charm is not only used by psychopaths & narcissists. There is quite a lot of potential to expand this article in quite a few ways for example superficial charm is used often in salesmanship etc in the manner of the salesman (note you wouldnt talk about him being charismatic). However expansion depends on reliable sources so expansion may take a while until new reliable sources are found. This article also includes charm offensive which is a manifestation of superficial charm.--Penbat (talk) 19:38, 23 November 2012 (UTC)