B Sides and C Sides and User talk:Vaughan: Difference between pages

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 05:25, 10 October 2008

schizophrenia source

where did you get the disorganized schizophrenia source about the following quote:

Unlike the paranoid subtype of schizophrenia, delusions and hallucinations are not the most prominent feature, although fragmentary delusions and hallucinations may be present.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Sp0 (talk • contribs) 17:52, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi there. Wlecome to the Wikipedia. The Smullyan book you asked about is What is the name of this book?. In this (and his other books too) he sets logic puzzles involving knights (who always tell the truth) and knaves (who always lie). This is of course an extension to the age-old problem of the two doors & two guards, one who lies and one who doesn't. Example from Smullyan: you meet two inhabitants of the knight-knave island, A and B. A says to you "I am a knave but B isn't."

It gets more complicated later on, when he introduces words which mean "yes" or "no" interchangeably depending on which type of person you speak to. The belief thing comes in Chapter 12, in Transylvania. Half of the inhabitants are insane, and believe only false things. The other half are sane and believe only true things. But humans always tell the truth, and vampires always lie. So an insane vampire will believe a false thing (2 + 2 is not 4) but will then lie about it, and say that it is. A sane vampire knows 2 + 2 is 4, but will lie and say it isn't. And mutatis mutandis for humans. It's a great book but you muy need to lie down afterwards and check for sanity ;-) -- Tarquin 16:48 Jan 8, 2003 (UTC)

Nice work at schizophrenia. I started that article long ago (though UseModWiki scrubbed its earliest history, which I think was around May 2001). Anyway, it's come along quite nicely since then. Koyaanis Qatsi 00:22 20 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Hello. I don't know anything about psychiatry, but don't you think it is better to say "In medicine, x is a condition in which ..." than to say "X is a medical term used to describe a condition in which ..."? A dog is not a term used to describe an animal; rather a dog is an animal. Moreover, if you must say "X is a term..." or "X refers to..." rather than "X is...", then X should be in italics, since you are referring to a term rather than using the term to refer to something else. Thus: "X is a term ...", etc. 131.183.84.166 21:35 20 Jul 2003 (UTC)

I was looking over the recent changes you've made to Schizophrenia and I was concerned about the removal of the existing references in favor of a list that you made. Now I don't know what your qualifications are and I assume that the references you added are wonderful, but some of the information that was in that reference is in the article. I added back the citation, but I'm concerned about the posibility that more important information other than the citation itself may have been deleted in this or other articles. I hope that I am way off base with this concern. The work that you have done on citing your sources is wonderful, however, this is not an academic text and for the purpose of an encyclopedia simply having a list of references is usually sufficient. That is to say that it is quite acceptable and should not be removed simply because there are other sources that are cited with superscripts. -- Ram-Man 00:08 23 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Just wanted to thank you for your response. I am happy this could be quickly resolved. -- Ram-Man 16:21 23 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Just saw your message on my talk page (I've been quite busy the last couple weeks). Should I add the articles I have done to Wikipedia:WikiProject Psychopathology, or just new ones in the future? -- Marumari 20:05, 25 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Trying to alert interested parties about the cluster of pages which I have listed under MCS. The pages are a mixture of psychology and information processing. If you use Recent Changes on MCS, you should see some concepts which are not due to me 169.207.90.93 02:39, 3 Nov 2003 (UTC) Never mind. I found a link: [1]. It appears to be real.

I just pasted the material you put on Kuroh5hin into the clinical lycanthropy article. I did some editing to make it more "encyclopedic", removing a few things that were tangental to the article's subject (such as the mention of how cultural factors may contribute to the stories of ghosts, for example) and making some of the wording a little more impersonal. Hope I didn't break anything in the process. :) Bryan 20:32, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Oh, while I'm reminded of the subject and since you clearly known a great deal about psychological-type subjects, a while back I encountered an uncertainty about the difference between kinesthesia and proprioception. I raised the issue on Talk:Proprioception and there's been some interesting feedback but I'd love to hear if there's an expert opinion on this subject. Bryan 20:39, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)

A category for psychiastrists is a good idea, but it should be limited to real people. Fictional psychiatrists should be in a separate category, or better yet in a subcategory of fictional characters, so I took out Lecter, the Crane brothers, and the Soprano psychiatrist. Cheers, : Vincent 06:23, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Hey. Re: social psychology edits, I just wanted to say thanks! Lucidish 18:57, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Folie a deux

It's not uncommon to reference popular culture in similar articles (e.g. Rain Man and Mercury Rising are both mentioned in the Autism) piece. The joke seems to be quite a good example of folie a deux, and supplements the rather short - and bland - case study above.

129.94.6.28 03:58, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Attachment theory

Hello, I've noticed the general subject are of your edits and wondered if you might want to look at my new article Attachment theory and give it your touch - don't know if it is something you know about.

Also, as I happened to look at your contribs I saw you had done some work on brain imaging. I've been wondering recently about why it is that we routinely X-ray people for internal physical problems but rarely brain scan people with behavioural difficulties or mental illness. Am I right in assuming it's largely a matter of cost?

As a sufferer of mental illness (clinical depression and with a bipolar family member) it would almost be a relief to me to be able to see something on a picture and go "there, that's why I'm different". Of course, I realise little is understood - but that would improve if imaging of ill people were widespread.

Would appreciate any insights you might have. --[[User:Bodnotbod|bodnotbod » .....TALKQuietly)]] 13:48, Aug 8, 2004 (UTC)

Thank you for your splendidly full answer to my questions. I may look into Harlow and the monkeys - though I find my interests are branching out exponentially and it's impossible to follow everything up. Best wishes, --[[User:Bodnotbod|bodnotbod » .....TALKQuietly)]] 14:06, Aug 9, 2004 (UTC)

Reply to Hi

A reply to your hi. Having come across this site only a week ago I am very enthused as to its ability to distill human knowledge and make that accessible to the world, essentially for free (not counting ISP access fees). Your contributions have been superb, as indeed have so many others. While not having the academic background to add much to the psychiatric pages I might from time to time make suggestions as I have done already. I am sure as I get a feel for the site I will become more active. CloudSurfer 20:24, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Research

I am afraid that my only access to academic articles is on the net. I have not been able to find any more recent symptom lists. I should check with the hospital where I am working as to whether they have an academic access but as I am in a small developing country, I rather doubt it. They are currently in the process of installing servers and computers which most here are unused to using. --CloudSurfer 06:51, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Delusion

Please see my comments in the Talk:Delusion page. --CloudSurfer 21:01, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Gene Ray, Schizophrenia

Uhm, his web page admits he was diagnosed with schizophrenia by a psychiatrist. I think the entry should be restored.

Psychiatry

Dear Vaughn, thanks for your note. Having had a bit of a look at the categories of psychiatry and psychology after I did a major recategorization of clinical illnesses I have realised just how much is in their area and how little in ours. (I keep assuming your a psychiatrist too.) Taking a psychiatric textbook approach I have felt we need to start from the basics, hence this morning's Mental status examination entry. Maybe we should create a list of article titles and we can go for it. I like the rarer stuff, like the Ganser syndrome article that was prompted by seeing a patient with this in the local prison, but I do think we need to do the basics and get them right. Which is not to say I think the MSE article is "right". I have put in a basic skeleton that will do for the moment but it needs more work on both the article and the various aspects linked to within it. It's all a good refresher course for me. --CloudSurfer 05:35, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Good to know your profession. I like working in a multidisciplinary team. After beavering away at the change in categories I think I upset one of the people looking after the psychology category who went through redoing their categories. It would be nice if we could work together on this project to achieve a sort of mini psych textbook. I think that would also help those who currently take a rather oppositional approach to find that we don't have three heads and aren't out to harm them. I can already see some of this mollification occurring with some contributors. Still my bias is to add to the clinical psychiatric area since this is my field. Tonight I am working on Psychiatric history which I hope to have ready for upload later tonight. Is there an article on Overvalued idea? If not there should be. Just a suggestion. [Grin] --CloudSurfer 08:50, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Re: hi there

Hi Vaughan, thanks for the welcome. I already saw your handle quite a few times in articles about psychopathology. You seem to be quite a prolific writer in this area, so I'm sure we'll meet again :) ... Sietse 20:10, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
Multi-Licensing Guide
Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

OR

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

Image:PhineasGageDeathMaskAndSkull.png

Hi! Thanks for uploading Image:PhineasGageDeathMaskAndSkull.png. I notice it currently doesn't have an image copyright tag. Could you add one to let us know its copyright status? (You can use {{gfdl}} if you release it under the GFDL, or {{fairuse}} if you claim fair use, etc.) If you don't know what any of this means, just let me know where you got the images and I'll tag them for you. Thanks so much, – Quadell ^{(talk) (help)} 18:32, Dec 23, 2004 (UTC)

Warning - your images could be deleted

Hello. I found another of your images with no source or copyright information. Image:Glassbrain.png. I notice you never tagged the image I asked about above, either. If we can't determine the copyright statuses of your images, they will soon be deleted. They're good images, and we'd like to keep them around. Please let me know the source and copyright information for these. – Quadell ^{(talk) (sleuth)} 19:19, Feb 16, 2005 (UTC)

Folie a deux- Shared delusions, visual hallucinations

I don't think you looked hard enough. Try: Medline, Telepathic Hallucinations: A New View of Ghosts-Frank Podmore, London, c1920 & Contacting Ronald K. Siegel, pscychopharamacologist, author of Whispers: Voice of Paranoia. Did you contact Dr.Oliver Sacks? I find this interesting because YOU couldn't find data on shared visual hallucinations, YOU being the EXPERT, deleted the data. How many professional clinical psychiatrists and psychotherapists did you question? How many clergymen? How many family doctors? How many hospitals? You guys kill me! You have extraordinary big heads. Have you ever examined yourself for delusions of grandeur? Put it back. Trust me on this. You only comfortably skimmed the surface. You have established boundaries on your curiosity. The idea seems uncomfortable to you? You are out of your field of expertise. Anonymous-guess why. 6/29/05

Getting Psychotherapy into This Week's Improvement Drive

Hi there! I noticed that you contribute a lot to Psychopathology and others, and I thought you might care to help out the Psychotherapy article. As it stands this article could use a lot of help, and thus I've taken the liberty of trying to get it to be the focus of a week's improvement drive. All we need to get it for a week's worth of focus and improvement is enough votes, so go to Psychotherapy's vote page and help out this very needing article! JoeSmack (talk) 21:28, July 25, 2005 (UTC)

Folie a Deux Why no chemical warfare?

Why have you established a boundary on the method of producing the phenomena? User talk: Kazuba 28 July 2005

Yeah I'm disappointed too

I'll do some digging at the U.S. Army Chemical Corp and see what I can get. Sometimes I get lucky. Give me some time. As Arnold, the governator, said, "I'll be back". Thanks for being kind enough to share. I'm sorry I called you a swell head. It is just that I keep getting the same response. "Well, I couldn't find the data , so I am going to delete it". (I have had to almost give a reference for each individual sentence). I have always hoped for the response, "Wow, this is really interesting. Tell me more. Let's see what I can dig up too! Here, I'll help you write it." Only once. Even then, the data had to be watered down because it was so unfamiliar, it may not be understood in the proper manner by the layman. Sometimes it it is difficult to put yourself in a child reader's place. As you can see I am a very curious person. It has always ( well, maybe not always but, a lot of the time, I've got to watch those cognitive distortions) gotten me in trouble. Thanks again. User talk: Kazuba 29 July 2005 Damn! I forgot to log in again. Oh well, I'm only a grunt. Frig it!

The cigarette story is weak

"When two individuals are both delirious they may play off each other's imaginings. A subject was once to mumble,"Gotta cigarette?" and when his companion held out an invisible pack, he followed with,"S'okay, don't wanna take your last one." Incapacitng Agents, James s. Ketchum M.D.; and FrederickR. Sidell, M.D. That's not good enough for me. There has been a verbal suggestion. No interrogation. Color of pack? Brand name? No controls. Do they really see the same thing? Doesn't any one wonder? You win some, you loose some. Thought you might find this amusing. As far as I have explored it, with invisible imaginary playmates, no one as ever asked," Do they really see the same thing?" Why not? Expecting more information. User talk:Kazuba

Designer Drug 2C-B

"One of the phenomena of 2C-B is that of shared hallucinations, where a group of users in a room together witness the same bizarre sights, sort of like people free-asociating with clouds in the sky: One person sees a dog chasing a mail man, the everyone else sees the cloud the same way, unable to see it any other way". Same problemo. Most likely a verbal suggestion has been heard and it captures the imagination of others. This is not what I am looking for. Still, it is interesting. User talk:Kazuba 5 Aug 2005 P.S Vaughn, you have got to read the rest of the story. It's funny. Westword.com/News/Dazed and Confused/2005-02-03

Psychotherapy

You have previously voted for Psychotherapy on WP:IDRIVE. It did not make it, but I have renominated it on the new Wikipedia:Medicine Collaboration of the Week. Please add your supporting vote there if you are still interested.--Fenice 21:14, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

Award

Just to let you know, I have added an award (Barnstar) to your page for outstanding continuing contributions to articles relating in the psychiatry and psychology feilds. --Admiral Roo 14:14, August 31, 2005 (UTC)

Your quite welcome. :) --Admiral Roo 14:29, August 31, 2005 (UTC)

Folie a deux BZ experiments

Geoffrey M. Fitzgerald, M.D., Consulting Staff, Concord Emergency Medical Associates, Concord Hosptial, Concord, NH, reported that two victims of BZ played tennis with imaginary racquets during tests. 8 Sept 2005

Fellow psychologists unite!

Hello, I've posted this on the schizophrenia article too, I'm a research psych based in London. I wondered over here from the stub on logorrhoea which was previously about its use in rhetoric. If you've got the time I'd appreciate you casting a critical eye over that and some other articles I've worked on, motor neurone disease and labile affect.

--PaulWicks 19:45, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

Vaughan,

Take it you're here at the IOP now? Please look me up (Paul Wicks) on the internal staff directory or drop me an email (p.wicks@iop.kcl.ac.uk). Sure we could drum up some more wikipedians from the psychiatry mothership! --PaulWicks 10:45, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

Vaughan,

I can't seem to find your email address since I moved computers. Can you email me again?

--PaulWicks 14:35, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Prosopagnosia Edit

Hi, Vaughan ! Thanks for the comment on your latest edit on the Prosopagnosia article. I agree that more substantial evidence would be useful, and I'm quite content to leave out the point about prosopagnosia perhaps being proportionately more common in gay men until we can support the statement with something more than an article in "Out" magazine ( at least, I think that's where I saw it ). I do feel, though, that you were being a bit cheeky by marking your edit as "minor" - deleting a substantive sentence is never minor, even if the deletion is perfectly reasonable. Anyway, let's see if we can get some more evidence... One thing that would be very interesting is to see if Baron-Cohen has anything to say on the matter. WMMartin 17:49, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Please check your images

I noticed that you have some images in the category Category:Images with unknown source. Due to the vast number of images in this category (12000+), and the fact that, lacking a source, they present considerable copyright uncertanty, Jimbo has stated, and added to the Criteria for Speedy Deletion, "Images in category "Images with unknown source" or "Images with unknown copyright status" which have been in the category for more than 7 days, regardless of when uploaded." This means the images can, and will, be deleted with no notice. To see a list of all the images you've uploaded(at least, under this username), review the upload log. If you have any questions, please let me know. JesseW, the juggling janitor 17:46, 20 September 2005 (UTC) JesseW, the juggling janitor 17:48, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

Folie a deux Redux

Hi Vaughn. Today I received an e-mail from Robert Gable, Professor of Psychology, Claremont Graduate University informing me about a report involving shared vision/hallucination by an anonymous 30-year-old physician using ceremonial ayahuasca. He asked if I had come across any creditable, published cases. I am referring him to the documents I have found on the NET and others I am trying to get from U.S. Army Chemical Corp. about BZ. Perhaps he will have better luck. For the moment I'm taking a break. Gave Up/formerly Kazuba 28 Oct 2005 Happy Halloween! (National Magic Day)

Anosognosia and spelling

You are absolutely right. I must have had a tia :). --DocJohnny 14:15, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Neuroscience

Hey, I notice you have worked on neuroscience-related articles in the past. I'm reviving the Wikipedia:WikiProject Neuroscience and thought you might care to join. Cheers. Semiconscious (talk · home) 09:05, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Barnstar

Thank you! That's such a pleasant thing to find on one's userpage. It's good to feel that other people appreciate some of the work, you know? S e miconscious • talk 18:47, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Mediation

Hi, Mihai has requested mediation with regard to the dispute you're having on Schizophrenia. Could you please summarise your side of the story at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-02-12 Schizophrenia in the Comments by others section. Lets hope we can get consensus on this one! :) - FrancisTyers 09:36, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Request your help with Biological psychiatry article

Hi, we're trying to improve the article on biological psychiatry. If you have time, I'd appreciate it if you could review that and make any corrections/suggestions you see fit. Thanks. Joema 18:48, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Gene Illusion

I've drafted a quick entry on Jay Joseph's The Gene Illusion, if you've read it I'd appreciate any thoughts, it seems to get widely cited so I thought it could do with an entry. --Coroebus 10:42, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

reply

Hi, yes the tool is User:Cyde/Ref converter, I think the reason those 2 got left at the bottom is because they are not actually used in the text as references, in which case things like that are normally put under a new heading called "Further reading". p.s. I didnt realise you were in the middle of fixing up that article, I hope I didn't interrupt you! Martin 11:14, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Ah yes, great job by the way Anorexia nervosa had been sub standard for quite a while, Bulimia nervosa is also surprisingly bad (as you have also noticed I see). Martin 11:21, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Psychology Wiki

Hi Vaughan,

I noticed that you are a interested in Psychology, and thought you might be interested in this project which I am involved in, The Psychology Wiki.

I won't say too much, as I'd like you to judge it for yourself, but you should find that it is different from Wikipedia, because approximately 90% of our contributors so far are psychologists, academics, or students and trainees.

Its hosted by a company called Wikia, which was founded by Jimmy Wales and Angela Beesley. There are Google Ads on the site, but we dont make money from the project, they're just to pay for the bandwidth, storage and technical support that Wikia give us.

Have a look and see what you think

Mostly Zen 00:35, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the post on Mindhacks Vaughan, letting all the blogs know about us is the next step in promoting our project :) Tom Michael - Mostly Zen

(talk) 10:38, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

PS, I have a list of Psychology blogs which I was going to approach to let them know about our project, but I am really not very familiar with how blogs work. Some of them have straightforward contact emails, but other ones seem to be put together from information from other parts of the net/other blogs. How do I best go about contacting them? Tom Michael - Mostly Zen

(talk) 12:44, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Folie s deux

This is not what I am hearing else where. This is not what I know from personal experiences of my self and the frightened testimony of my wife. "Since I have been sleeping alone I no longer see those terrible things standing at the foot of the bed. What did they look like, babe?" (Of course I already knew.) This is not what I know from my psychiatrist, therapist, and medical doctor. If it is not folie a deux then what is this phenomena of shared visual hallucinations in a psychotic state? (You better not say demons, etc.) Why can't this be chemically induced? The ingestion of substances can result in the experience of disturbing emotional changes and behavior? You know these things can be shared by drug free family members, etc. Again if it is not folie a deux what is it? I have not come across any material that describes this as a "mimic" of a psychological disorder from the authors in the NATO military manual or Ronald K. Siegel. Explain. You have had "hands on" experience with this stuff? Or is it just outside your field of encounter? There is no possibility, since when? Possibilites and early reports are outside the scope of encyclopedias (and the wikipedia)? Not the ones I've read. What would you write rather than completely delete? Please reply.User:Kazuba 25 Aug 06

So you are saying when induced by drugs the phenomena "mimics" folie a deux? (Though I find this nowhere else.) That's good, except aren't natural chemicals in the body associated with the creation of Folie a deux? Aren't the drugs used (risperdal, etc.)to treat shared psychotic disorder also made of chemicals? Are you a psychiatrist? Please give me more information. User:Kazuba 25 Aug 06

Here is my argument. One the classic results of smoking marijuana, hashish and LSD is the temporary creation of paranoia. This is how I see folie a deux. It is the result of being psychotic (or possibly only anxious). Becoming temporarily psychotic (or anxious) was the result of the substance BZ. While our poor volunteers are psychotic (or anxious) they begin to have invividual delusions. One of these delusions, of which there seem to have been many, is the creation of visual hallucinations. It would seem if there is a close proximity, or maybe a close bond between our volunteers, one of them can become dominate and share his delusions, by emotional contagion, in the form of visual hallucinations, or other ways, with his companions. They may see what the dominate one sees, in some cases exactly, folie a deux. Hasn't BZ caused folie a deux?

Though I have only read short articles about the sinking of the USS Indianapolis in World War 2, and only heard the brief interviews with the survivors. It looks lke this phenomena began to occur with some of them. They began to share delusions, even to the point of seeing a rescue ship that was not there and swimming toward it. Wouldn't this be folie a deux? Possibly without even becoming psychotic, but by creating the hallucinations out of anxiety. They are not mentally ill. It is the result of circumstance, and emotional contagion. Aren't shared visual hallucinations between two people always called folie a deux? Aren't we looking at emotional contagion carrying these delusions, or folie a deux? Ooops! You never answered the question. Have you had "hands on" experience with folie a deux? Yes or no? I take it none with claims of shared visual hallucinations. I think people just don't talk about visual hallucinations, because others will think they are weird. Unless they think these are ghosts, the Virgin Mary or such. User:Kazuba 26 Aug 06 Please reply

Anorexia article

I would like to change the status of anorexia as being the most deadly psychiatric disorder back to being disputed, since, regardless of evidence shown in an article, it is still disputed. I'm not challenging whether it likely is the most deadly disorder; I'm contesting the existence of a concensus in the medical community.--Loodog 01:56, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Comments on Schizophrenia article

Given all that has been done, I wonder how you'd feel about putting in a request to remove the page protection and if the other user continues to blank the page, then you could put in a request to have him blocked...I would certainly support that. Since he has refused mediation and it is clear his actions amount, now, to vandalism, that seems like the best course of action. Your throughts? RalphLender^talk 21:42, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

The Mediation Cabal: Request for case participation

Dear Vaughan: Hello, my name is Glen S; I'm a mediator from the Mediation Cabal, an informal mediation initiative here on Wikipedia. You've recently been named as a dispute participant in a mediation request here:

Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/schizophrenia

I'd like to invite you to join this mediation to try to get this dispute resolved, if you wish to do so; note, however, it is entirely your choice whether or not you participate, and if you don't wish to take part in it that's perfectly alright. Please read the above request and, if you do feel that you'd like to take part, please make a note of this on the mediation request page. If you have any questions or queries relating to this or any other dispute, please do let me know; I'll try my best to help you out. Thank you very much. Best regards, Glen 23:59, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Schizophrenia and Smoking

I think the meterial that you moved to the talk page can be added back. The articles are available (although you must register, it is free.) Articles on MedScape are peer-reviewed. It is an on-line journal and they only publish articles that they peer-review. So, would you consider adding it back? DPeterson^talk 13:43, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Medscape is a primary source and the articles are peer reviewed by professionals in the relevant field...it is not the AMA, but is isn't Good HouseKeeping either. The articles cited are primary source with Medscape being the source. My reading of Wikipedia is that material should meet the standard of being verifiable and, I think, that material does...but, if you disagree, maybe we could discuss it further(?) DPeterson^talk 23:01, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar

Hi Vaughan, thanks for the barnstar! Must meet up again in the new year... --PaulWicks 15:21, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Nick Drake

Hi Vaughan, though I'm flattered you think the article is ready for FA, I'm not sure it is. I've been working on it since August, and was hoping to nominate in a month or so. There is ALOT of work left to be done before I would be happy with taking it to that stage. I really don't want to cause offence, but I've requested withdrawl on the FAC page. Thanks + Ceoil 20:55, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Vaughan, thanks! + Ceoil 21:10, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, thank you

Thank you for the star...I appreciate it. regards. DPeterson^talk 21:33, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Regarding reversions[2] to Schizophrenia

Warning

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. Glen 11:10, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi there, many thanks for your concern. As you can see from the talk page and the archived talk pages of the schizophrenia article, the person whose edits I keep reverting persistently edits the article with their own point of view despite numerous reviews which have concluded that the relevant material is balanced and verifiable. Their actions are now at the point of vandalism. This has been reported but so far nothing has been done. I am fully aware of the three revert rule, and have complied with this in the past. All that has meant is that material from the article remains blanked while months pass until the issue is temporarily resolved. Then the user returns to do the same. Myself and the other editors of the article are now reverting this vandalism, which is in line with Wikipedia policy and exempt from the 'three revert rule'. Please read the numerous discussions and reviews on the talk page for further details. [Also posted to your discussion page] - Vaughan 12:12, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Schizophrenia article vandalism by User:Mihai cartoaje

I have started a Rfc on his conduct and need another signature on the filing for it to be reviewed. You can see it at I filed an Rfc regarding Mihai cartoaje's conduct and need another signature.

see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Mihai_cartoaje#Statement_of_the_dispute I'd appreciate it if you would look at it and consider being the second signer. DPeterson^talk 23:53, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Very odd edit

I assume this was a mistake ([3]). --Dweller 13:57, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Dedication award

		The WikiProject Neuroscience Award
		Here's to Vaughan for developing & redeveloping schizophrenia over 3 years and thru FAC & FAR cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:09, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

..now we have a template for FA I've been playing with bipolar disorder and Borderline Personality Disorder, though I think the former would be a herculean effort, maybe the latter isn't too big an ask.cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:12, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

[[4]]...cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 09:09, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Typekey service most likely lost connection with MindHacks blog..

..probably due to the mentioned shift of the blog to other server. So now it's impossible to leave a comment. It says "The site that you want to leave a comment on is not subscribed to this service. Please inform the site's owner". P.S. The MindBlog is cool. Best regards, CopperKettle 18:06, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Nutrition and schizophrenia

Why was the article from Nutrition Journal removed from the last edit? It was a peer-reviewed article, considered the highest reliability by Wiki standards. Gnif global (talk) 17:32, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

A review with over a 100 articles cited constitutes a section. Research and clinical trials published in peer-reviewed journals cannot be refuted by you and represent the Wikipedia opinion if you do not agree with them. Revert the article back or someone will. Gnif global (talk) 19:28, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

schizophrenia definition criticism

why did you subtract criticism section? Any problem? 201.42.220.83 (talk) 18:43, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

I haven't. It has a fairly substantial criticism section (see 'diagnostic issues and controversies') which I contributed a fair amount to myself - Vaughan (talk) 18:50, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

"diagnostic issues" 201.42.220.83 (talk) 18:55, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

It's here - Vaughan (talk) 18:58, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

ok, thanks. 201.42.220.83 (talk) 19:00, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Image:WolfiBandHainSmall.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:WolfiBandHainSmall.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? BlueAzure (talk) 04:26, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Images - this isn't the best place to be uploading them

Please upload images to Commons, not Wikipedia. If you want to be extra nice, you could move your old uploads there too. Richard001 (talk) 08:36, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

maybe the time's right....

OK, work has started on a major overhaul of major depressive disorder which I moved by consensus from clinical depression. I am pleased with how schizophrenia turned out and there's a couple of folks interested in polishing this one up. While there's a bit of a synergy maybe we can get it to FAC sometime soonish. All hands on deck would be extremely helpful....Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:06, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Rivers

Thank you! I'm glad you like the article; it's nice to know that I might be writing something worthy of him! I'm sorry I haven't updated it that much recently- the problem is that I'm in the process of collecting information and documentation to write a biography of him which I hope to have published. If I post everything on here then there will be no point publishing and he certainly deserves to have a better (and more personal) biography than the one by Slobodin. Unfortunately, this means that many of the things I have collected together- including family photos and the like- will not be seen until I get around to finishing the book, something I fear I may not be qualified to do, being a 19 year old English student (we're not known for our scientific genius, even at Oxford!) I hope you'll excuse my lamentations here and thank you again for the encouragement! P.S. there have been suggestions that Rivers might have been bipolar; what are your thoughts? (If you need more information to work on then I would be happy to send you some) --Pudupudu (talk) 15:45, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Henry Head

I've just spent the day writing Head's page and I seem to have encountered a few problems that I wonder if you could help me with. 1) I haven't the faintest idea how to reference and am technically challenged in the extreme 2) I don't think it's right for wiki, it seems too 'personal', somehow (which is hardly surprising since I'm somewhat on the obsessed side when it comes to him and Rivers... not that anyone could guess). What do you think? 3) It's 4:49 am and I've been living off an average of 4 hours sleep per night and was exhausted earlier- why am I wide awake?! (that was a note to myself really, don't feel the need to reply to it :-P ) I'm sorry about the delay in sending you the Rivers stuff, I've been over at wikisource sticking his articles up. Anyway, sorry about the essay. Kayleigh --Pudupudu (talk) 03:54, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to message again. I *think* I have sorted point one (except for the fact I don't know how to do footnotes yet) but this was at the cost of number three (oh well, who needs sleep?) I'm still unsure about number two so if you could take a look that would be wonderful. I also have some rather good pictures of Head and Ruth but I have no idea if I'm allowed to use them (grr) --Pudupudu (talk) 08:02, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you! I really do wish that things on here were allowed to have a little warmth to them, it makes biographies seem so impersonal to write them like textbooks and one would hope that if you're writing an article on someone then you actually care a little about them (but that's probably just me being 'protopathic'; I certainly can't do things by halves). Ah yes, 'to sleep: perchance to dream'. I think the 'rub' in my case comes from the fact I've just moved rooms for the vac and this one's much lighter than my other so it'll take a bit of adjusting to. I will get some sleep tonight as I have work tomorrow: I seem to have a very confused identity at the moment as I'm working as a research assistant for a Fellow writing a biography on P.G Wodehouse by day and then coming back and writing about scientists. Anyway, excuse my random rambling (if you're feeling kind you can put it down to sleep deprivation). Kayleigh--Pudupudu (talk) 20:22, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Vaughan

Survey request

Hi, Vaughan I need your help. I am working on a research project at Boston College, studying creation of medical information on Wikipedia. You are being contacted because you have been identified as an important contributor to one or more articles.

Would you will be willing to answer a few questions about your experience? We've done considerable background research, but we would also like to gather the insight of the actual editors. Details about the project can be found at the user page of the project leader, geraldckane. Survey questions can be found at geraldckane/medsurvey. Your privacy and confidentiality will be strictly protected!

The questions should only take a few minutes. I hope you will be willing to complete the survey, as we do value your insight. Please do not hesitate to contact me or Professor Kane if you have any questions. Thank You, BCproject (talk) 08:12, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Vaughan The reference to your paper at the beginning of the discussion section in the Martha Mitchell effect entry does note have a reference to the citation listed at the bottom (i.e. a superscript). I am not a Wikipedia author, so this may not use the appropriate jargon, but you will see what I mean if you check it out. Also, how would I go about contacting you via email? I am j.c.hansen@att.net, and would like to get a copy of the "beliefs about delusions" paper. Thanks - Jonathan C. Hansen 76.201.21.84 (talk) 18:50, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Schizophrenia FAR

Schizophrenia has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 05:25, 10 October 2008 (UTC)