User talk:hmwith/March10
| 2007 | <<
|
<<
|
<<
|
•
|
•
|
•
|
•
|
•
|
•
|
•
|
•
|
|||||||||||||
| 2008 | •
|
•
|
•
|
•
|
•
|
•
|
•
|
•
|
•
|
•
|
•
|
|||||||||||||
| 2009 | •
|
•
|
•
|
•
|
•
|
•
|
•
|
•
|
•
|
•
|
•
|
|||||||||||||
| 2010 | •
|
•
|
•
|
•
|
>>
|
>>
|
>>
|
>>
|
>>
|
>>
|
>>
|
>>
|
Dear Someguy1221,
I am editing the Borderline personality disorder intensively, recently. I would like to ask for your advise about a specific issue with this page, as well as some more general advice. Please refer to the following paragraph that I found under Psychotherapy:
- Dialectical Behavior Therapy is an innovative method of treatment that has been developed specifically to treat this difficult group of patients in a way which is optimistic and which preserves the morale of the therapist. The technique has been devised by Marsha Linehan at the University of Washington in Seattle and its effectiveness has been demonstrated in a controlled study (reference http://priory.com/dbt.htm).
I found quite a few problems with this paragraph:
- It reads too much like an advertisement of original-research.
- It has peackock and weasel entries.
- It uses an odd, unclear jargon, which seems inappropriate.
- It has a dubious link, which is inserted improperly.
- The said link appears only in the "Further reading" section of a spawned article: Dialectical behavior therapy.
- The said spawned article seems to be full of similar (deemed) flaws and faults.
- Similar (deemed) flaws and faults seem to have infiltrated a parallel article: Management of borderline personality disorder.
- The cited source seems to confuse "study" and "trial". It seems to rely heavily on concepts such as "Budhism", "Zen", "Meditation" and "spiritualism". It seems to deal with the well-being of the therapist (...?).
Can you please explain to me how I can suggest the nomination of Dialectical behavior therapy for deletion? can you please also suggest to me where and how I can seek support and advice, as well as tips and suggestions of experienced editors and admins for the purpose of helping me edit better and being a better overall editor? How about recommendations of pages to edit? When I first joined Wikipedia I had some useful contributions inserted to my talk page, but I seem to need updated contacts whom I can turn to for these matters. Can you please help me by having a link appear for me, for where I can read your reply? I appreciate your help on this. --Shimon Yanowitz (talk) 16:03, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
- Did this mean to be addressed to me (hmwith) or Someguy1221 (whose talk page is here? hmwith☮ 20:42, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
- Regardless, for how to nominate a page for deletion, see WP:Redirects for discussion. You could try also going through editor review for editing tips, and I get recommended pages from SuggestBot. Sorry about the delayed response time, but I hope these tips help. hmwith☮ 20:56, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
Oh, dude
This is a severe blow to my self esteem... :( bahamut0013wordsdeeds 18:33, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- Ha, oh, EVula... hmwith☮ 09:05, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 18:29, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
Ping!
Might interest you Ironholds (talk) 06:00, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the link. I'll let you guys know as soon as I can. hmwith☮ 20:40, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
Glibertarian listed at RfD
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Glibertarian. Since you had some involvement with the Glibertarian redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). 66.127.52.47 (talk) 15:55, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
