Talk:Supportive psychotherapy

Psychology Low‑importance

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Medicine: Psychiatry Low‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Psychiatry portal This article is supported by the Psychiatry task force (assessed as Low-importance).

WP:MEDRS

Latest comment: 6 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

Ugog Nizdast, regarding this, see WP:MEDRS. The editor added poor sources; that is why I reverted (as briefly noted on that editor's talk page). Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 21:40, 28 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Flyer22 Reborn: By mistake I meant using counter-vandalism softare/rollback against a good-faith edit, per Wikipedia:Rollback#When_to_use_rollback.

I'm self reverting. But it would be great if you could explain to this editor, exactly how WP:MEDRS is violated and how she can improve on her edit should she choose to do so. I did mention WP:MEDRS to her but lacked the knowledge to judge her edit further since I lack the expertise. To my untrained eye, the edit has a mix of references which look like journals and some looking like news sites devoted to mental health professionals. I'm guessing it won't be obvious to this new editor too (how the edit is completely not MEDRS-compliant) and you can advise her better. I'll notify her that this discussion is taking place here if you do.

Disclosure: I've participated with this editor in the edit-a-thon. Ugog Nizdast (talk) 14:20, 29 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

The edits included WP:Primary sources, which WP:MEDRS generally discourages the use of. It also included sources that fall under WP:MEDPOP or the section immediately below WP:MEDPOP. I'll leave a message about this at WP:Med for more commentary. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 16:19, 29 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

concur w/ Flyer22 Reborn--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 17:50, 29 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

Add topic