Talk:Parochialism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is obtuse, confusing, and to someone who is not familiar with the idea, it is hard to tell if it even deals with the subject! I'm not qualified to do it, but someone should. --Seldumonde 17:44, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Issue of Neutrality

This article speaks in terms of almost moral values (e.g. victims, harmful, problem) and makes claims regarding the consequences of this system that are sufficiently unsupported by the rest of the article that they can seem wildly disconnected (e.g. "This [Parochialism] supports and/or leads to governmental corruption and deters real economic health ...").

This article should be labeled as not be in conformance with Wikipedia's neutraility standards to solicit the assistance of qualified parties to flesh out and/or balance its content. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.69.159.113 (talk) 22:01, 12 April 2007 (UTC).

[edit] VERY ambiguous

I agree with Seldumonde... I tried to use this article for reference but could not even come up with a definition for Parochialism. After having read it, I am no more better off than I was previously. Someone with at least decent familiarity needs to at least define it!--208.102.26.84 00:32, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lamo

I needed to find a better definition, so i came here, and quess what?....... it SUCKED!!!!!! My opinion of wikipedia just lowered!!

header 1	header 2	header 3
it stank	it sucked	it was dumb
i disliked it	i hated it	talk about stupid