Talk:Profession: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 21:54, 2 January 2022 edit2600:1700:4320:7c30:b578:f55:9e22:98a (talk) KingTags: Reverted Mobile edit Mobile web edit← Previous edit		Revision as of 22:56, 2 January 2022 edit undoTalpedia (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users4,521 edits rollbackTags: Manual revert 2017 wikitext editor Next edit →
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{WikiProject banner shell\|1		{{WikiProject banner shell\|1=
			{{WikiProject Business\|class=start\|importance=low}}
			{{WikiProject Sociology\|class=Start\|importance=Mid}}
			{{WikiProject Occupations\|class=start\|importance=high}}
			}}

			{{archives\|auto=long\|search=yes\|bot=MiszaBot I\|age=3\|units=months}}
			{{User:MiszaBot/config
			\|archiveheader = {{Talkarchivenav\|noredlinks=y}}
			\|maxarchivesize = 200K
			\|counter = 1
			\|minthreadsleft = 4
			\|algo = old(90d)
			\|archive = Talk:Profession/Archive %(counter)d
			}}
	==Opinion piece==		==Opinion piece==
	This article feels like an opinion piece based on someone's understanding of where professions are today. Reference to the history of the professionalisation of medicine in different countries shows that the basis of professionalism is the formation of self regulation to ensure quality and to combat devaluation and charlatans. The sequence provided, especially of establishing a training school is largely wrong. Apprenticing was the general route historically.		This article feels like an opinion piece based on someone's understanding of where professions are today. Reference to the history of the professionalisation of medicine in different countries shows that the basis of professionalism is the formation of self regulation to ensure quality and to combat devaluation and charlatans. The sequence provided, especially of establishing a training school is largely wrong. Apprenticing was the general route historically.

Revision as of 22:56, 2 January 2022

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

	Business portal 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

	Society portal 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.

Opinion piece

This article feels like an opinion piece based on someone's understanding of where professions are today. Reference to the history of the professionalisation of medicine in different countries shows that the basis of professionalism is the formation of self regulation to ensure quality and to combat devaluation and charlatans. The sequence provided, especially of establishing a training school is largely wrong. Apprenticing was the general route historically.

Professions self regulate until a power group seizes control. Then government regulation and oversight ensure internal processes of control are not abused by the power group for the benefit of the profession and society. Ethical rules are established. Training and education in formal schools and curriculum come later not before. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Strider22 (talk) 12:24, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

I agree. Some parts, such as Characteristics and Autonomy, look like a high school essay, not an encyclopedia. There are too many quotations and in-line citations. I have tried to get the section on prestige up to standards more ...prestigious and professional. TiTJiL (talk) 06:14, 2 July 2020 (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 a 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)

... 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)

Eid fazer Alex Macuácua (talk) 20:54, 25 August 2020 (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)

Totally agree; also theft out is the Profession of Public Service. Jakolaw (talk) 15:03, 12 January 2020 (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)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Profession. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:05, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Categories: