Talk:Resistance training

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Resistance training redirect.
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

Archives

/Merger discussion

This article is a mess. Its like someone rushed to type it in 2 minutes. It NEEDS citations at least. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.163.246.69 (talk) 04:22, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Empirical Findings[edit]

There are lots of important and useful findings of resistance training research. These should be placed in Wikipedia. I need to read the research more thoroughly first Ashernm (talk) 19:32, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Science of Resistance Training[edit]

If someone wants to rewrite this to be a good article, they have a fantastic research article they could summarize: http://faculty.pepperdine.edu/mfeltner/Classes/SPME330/ps1.pdf Ywaz (talk) 18:32, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Basic principles section[edit]

Not sure the last paragraph of the "Basic principles" section is proper. I think that the information could still be relevant but needs to be re-worded.MrNiceGuy1113 (talk) 22:18, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to strength training[edit]

This definition looks to be original research. It defines "resistance training" as a specific kind of strength training utilizing hydraulic or elastic resistance. Firstly, that is not the way the term is commonly used in literature whether academic or not. Secondly, what is the point of this distinction? It makes no difference to training where the resistance comes from, assuming it is applied in the same direction & resistance curve.

If no-one can give a good reason to keep, I will merge this article and its corresponding section into the main strength training article. ··gracefool☺ 08:13, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep for now but clean up and add citations showing significance and contributions. --Maniwar (talk) 14:52, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merge - I thought much the same thing when I first encountered the article but assumed that it was some technical term that meant something specific to some group. If that's not the case it's just confusing. PRL42 (talk) 17:02, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I thought the same as you till I read this article above. If I had time I would myself work on it, but oh well...C'est la vie. I would definitely ask that this talk page be merged as well so that that link could be utilized, if it is merged. --Maniwar (talk) 01:07, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK have merged. Feel free to work in that link to the article somewhere. ··gracefool☺ 03:08, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]