Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 15:56, 3 November 2016

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Business Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Sociology Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Occupations (inactive) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Occupations, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.OccupationsWikipedia:WikiProject OccupationsTemplate:WikiProject OccupationsOccupations

Archives

Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

Doctors are not necessarily physicians

The link of Doctor should be corrected and pointed to http://en.wikipedia.org/Doctor_%28title%29 which is more appropriate than physician. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.19.32.71 (talk) 00:14, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Provincial color?

What the hell is this? I google and only get paint and wood stain colors. As a section it seems trivial and unnecessary. Maaaaaybe it would be worth keeping as a sentence in the History section. 98.116.253.94 (talk) 19:18, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Good point. This 2010 edit was very odd and I have undone it. – Fayenatic London 21:12, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Left out a "rule"?

Professionals are paid by the person or entity they work on behalf of. e.g. a doctor is paid by their patient, a lawyer by his client. If, in the case of "social work" the client is not the one doing the paying, problems like conflict of interest arise. Why is this 'payment by client' not in the list of rules? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.175.252.113 (talk) 10:42, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

... because it's hardly universal. Many professions, including those mentioned here, can exist when paid for by the state, the client for their work, to act for third parties (patients, litigants/defendants, citizens) who then isn't the client in the fiscal sense. For example, an English doctor is paid by the NHS to be a doctor, and is expected to act professionally towards her patients, her colleagues and other members of the medical profession. The patients are service users, and receive the benefit of the service. They may or may not have actually paid for it. Matt Whyndham (talk) 15:24, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

The Profession of Arms

Not included on the list of professions, the profession of arms is arguably one of the first and fundamental professions. Far before science and technology lent it's hand to doctors or lawyers it was applied to the profession of arms first I believe the definition has "lost touch" in recent times and would like to engage on any alternate opinions. I believe the profession of arms includes all required criteria. I recognized the following criteria apply to all professions. A defined set of practices. Education and/or training requirements for entry. Some type of measurement for entry (like an examination). A process for advancing its practices. A set of ethics/rules/etc. A controlling or defining body Why the Military is a profession? -- A defined set of practices--Successful Military forces throughout history refer to these practices as "Doctrine", a method by-which they do business. -- Education and/or training requirements for entry.-- All professional military forces throughout history have some variation of a "basic training". -- Some type of measurement for entry (like an examination).-- Standards for mental capacity and physical fitness are more often than not the most common example of this. -- A process for advancing its practices.-- Continuous demand/review to upgrade military capacity, capability, or combat power are a constant effort. The US military reviews/edits/trains doctrine to match changes in science, technology or capability. -- A set of ethics/rules/etc. The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) and the Code of Conduct are two examples by-which the US have established ethics and rules. -- A controlling or defining body.-- Militaries throughout history have a Chain-of-Command (CoC). In the US the CoC begins with the President and Secretary of Defense all the way down to Joe in a fox hole. We have executive and judicial oversight by civilians outside the CoC.

With this discussion, I would like the Profession of Arms to be added to the overall list of professions, and should be recognized as one of the fundamental professions alongside Doctors, Lawyers and Engineers.

A cogent argument in opposition to your view exists on the Talk page of List of professions. I don't have a dog in this fight, so I will not express an opinion. I think some 'rules' have been enumerated on several pages regarding what defines a 'profession,' but these 'definitions' are not consistently applied, hence the confusion.

Please sign your posts on talk pages. The sinebot missed your entry, or possibly did not exist when you posted. Consequently, there is no way to contact you on your usertalk page. Thank you. Rags (talk) 06:12, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Disinterested

I have restored this adjective to the principal definition, as originally defined by the Webbs. In this sense being "disinterested" means being uninfluenced by considerations of personal advantage; it does not mean behaving without feeling or interest. Salisian (talk) 13:36, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

• All unassessed articles
• Start-Class WikiProject Business articles
• Low-importance WikiProject Business articles
• WikiProject Business articles
• Start-Class sociology articles
• Mid-importance sociology articles