Talk:Confusion

Merge

Have added to merge list:

Merge Mental confusion into Delirium since the current Mental confusion article mostly describes specifically delirium rather than confusion in general. Create a new article Confusion (clinical) discussing the clinical sign of confusion and the differentiation between its acute cause (Delirium) and its chronic cause (Dementia). --Lee Collier 07:01, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Acute and Chronic Confusion, Delirium, Dementia

There are already articles about Delirium and Dementia, which are synonymous with Acute Confusion and Chronic Confusion respectively. To avoid confusion (!) useful information from this article (which seems to mainly refer to acute confusion) should be rolled into those two articles and this article used as a discussion of the difference between the two. There is no difference medically between 'mental confusion' and 'confusion' ('mental' is redundant) but there is a difference between the general usage of 'confusion' and its specific clinical meaning.

I'll watch these pages and make the changes I've outlined unless someone suggests a good reason not to.

I've done some cleanup. But since confusion is not the same as delerium (even with the large overlap), two separate articles are justified. The umbrella article should be cognitive dysfunction, which does not yet exist. SBHarris 03:06, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

temp

ill try again

Page seems to lack lots of information

Is there a difference between "confusion" and "mental confusion"? If the answer is "no", this article seems to be missing quite a bit of information. One could be "confused" in the sense that their mind is in a state where it's reasoning capabilities are highly retarded, but it can also simply describe a mental state in which the mind lacks enough knowledge to determine the truth or make a sound judgement. It can also describe a state in which one is aware of a multiple number of possible answers to a question in which only one is true, yet each answer that the person is aware of is equally plausible with the person's current level of information.

I agree. "confusion" directs here, but here is not an article about confusion, but some pseudo-scientific psychiatric stuff which was not what I was looking for. The word dates back to the 13th century - the current article seems to be from a medical text book.93.96.148.42 (talk) 23:23, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Vandalism

I deleted: "Nonplussed is the act or state of being without plus. To be bored or unimpressed. Dave totally owes me lunch, regardless of any edits made to wikipedia." Nonplussed could have a place in this article but it was definitely out of context. And, what follows after the Nonplussed sentence doesn't make any sense. 75.68.238.185 (talk) 06:12, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

As you'll see two sections down, I came here as a redirect from Nonplussed. I'm not sure it belongs here either; but if it does, it should have some kind of mention.--Mrcolj (talk) 00:28, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Seems better suited to Simple

Why are all the terms defined instead of wikified? kaiti-sicle 05:26, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 16:30, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Nonplussed

"Nonplussed" redirects here. "Nonplus" redirects to a non-notable 80s British dark ambient / industrial band (Konstruktivits), because they had one unpopular track with that gothomoric name. Will someone with the skills redirect "nonplus" here, or just delete the redirect altogether? And if you're angry at the spam, go ahead and look at whatever redirects to said band exist... --Mrcolj (talk) 00:27, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Redirect (finally) deleted. --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 17:27, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Mental Confusion- diagnosis or description

This article is currently about some recently invented medical description, although the word is over 700 years old. While the pathological elements are important, I think they are of secondary significance.93.96.148.42 (talk) 23:33, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

external source

doesnt cover mental confusion as the result of an external event or abuse or intentionally engineered mental confusion.--Penbat (talk) 11:51, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Tagged for expert opinion needed

December 2013; there is a need to have someone knowledgeable step in here. The request to merge Mental confusion (this article) into Delirium has been pending for several years. If this happens (or not) should probably depend on input from someone in the field who knows what they're talking about. See >>>here<<< for the prior discussion. Any further discussion should also probably take place there INSTEAD of here. I have left the discussion open for now, but have removed the stale merger banners. Thanks, GenQuest ^{"Talk to Me"} 02:19, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

By no means can you consider me an expert, but “confusion” is a broader concept than a medical symptom. For example, somebody studying a difficult subject matter such as mathematics may be readily confused; likewise, the Law School Admission Test contains a whole section (or 2) of confusing “logic puzzles.” I realize that “Wikipedia is not a how-to manual,” but nevertheless you could add a section on what conditions (e.g. having to deal with multiple stimuli simultaneously) or subject-matter characteristics (e.g. lack of familiarity) could cause confusion in a normal person, strategies for understanding confusing situations, etc. 2600:1003:B014:7BFD:0:42:4701:DE01 (talk) 01:32, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Mental confusion is not the same as delirium although both are similar mental dysfunctions. They should not be merged. --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 17:31, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Confused in forest.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:27, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

"😕" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect 😕 and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 May 3#😕 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Veverve (talk) 12:01, 3 May 2022 (UTC)