LoganSwen

Welcome!

Hello, LoganSwen, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Ian and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.

I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing.

Handouts
Choosing an article to edit Editing an article • Add images to articles Citing sources on Wikipedia
Additional Resources
You can find answers to many student questions on our Q&A site, ask.wikiedu.org

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 01:38, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Group Nine Discussion

Group Nine! How's it going? This is just to start the collaboration of what topic we are going to do for the wiki project. Tori mentioned doing the topic of Generalization because Dr.Council has it listed as a stub article and it is part of chapter nine. Thoughts? Suggestions?LoganSwen (talk) 16:24, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Hey everyone! Generalization is a possibility. It doesn't have a ton of options to branch off from, but a positive is it is in our chapter. I will keep looking. Tori Veth (talk) 19:16, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello Group 9! This is Lexi, I peeked at the extensive Psychology Stubs list and found a couple of interesting topics. Feel free to oppose or suggest something else. My first find was Psychosexual disorder. There are so many subcategories on this topic, and I don't believe we would have issues finding credible resources. Freud is the source of the disorder; he is an interesting man in himself. We could cover all the different disorders that fall under Psychosexual Disorders and define them. Also, we could cover the controversy of homosexuality in the military.

My second find is Limbic imprint. I find this topic a bit more interesting! The article is lacking majorly in material, although I could imagine we could find some interesting information. In my Child Psychopathology class we briefly covered an older, potentially harmful, therapy in which patients were squeezed in sleeping bags to recreate a birthing experience. The therapy caused multiple fatalities and has since been banned for obvious reasons. I believe we can find several more theories and/or therapies stemming from Limbic Imprinting.

Let me know what you guys think! --Lex.schirado (talk) 19:59, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Hey Group 9! This is Jerome. It's unbelievable how many possible subjects that there are! At first, I wanted to say generalization is a safe bet but I think that was just because it was the first one that I had heard. After looking through some details regarding Psychosexual Disorders and Limbic Imprint, I would have to put my vote on Psychosexual Disorder. My reasoning for this is because of what Lexi stated regarding Sigmund Freud. Obviously our goal is to improve the article and we will do that with any subject that we choose but between the two options thus far, Frued would supply the most valid information in my eyes. Both subjects are indeed interesting however. That is my input thus far and I have no possible topics to throw out for possibly acceptance but I will keep looking around to find something to suggest! JeromeBegin (talk) 04:09, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

I looked at both the topics and I think either one would be interesting and and doable so, maybe we just make these two our choices. Which one should be our first choice and our second choice though? Thoughts team! LoganSwen (talk) 17:39, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Either topic would give us a good base to add sufficient information to. Personally, I find the limbic imprint topic the most interesting, but really we could work with either. Unless we discover another! Tori Veth (talk) 03:00, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

I like the limbic imprint idea also, maybe do that as our first choice and have psychosexual disorder on deck if the first one is taken?LoganSwen (talk) 03:09, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

I am neutral as to which one is our first choice so lets go with majority and say limbic imprint is our primary with Psychosexual disorders being our secondary? Does that sound ideal? I do agree that either subject will be a legitimate possibility to make an outstanding article. I am excited to begin researching either subject. JeromeBegin (talk) 03:27, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

I will do whatever you guys want to do, I completely willing to do either. I am so glad you guys liked my suggestions! So, from what I see, Limbic Imprint is our primary choice?--Lex.schirado (talk) 16:07, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Okay great! Yes, lets make Limbic imprint our primary source and go from there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tori Veth (talk • contribs) 17:19, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Dr. Council's comments on your article choices

I don't know about limbic imprint - it sound like it could be pop psychology and/or a psychotherapy fad. Psychosexual disorder probably has more potential for development. The concept has a long history, even besides what Freud had to say about it. Richard von Krafft-Ebing and Havelock Ellis both did important work on this topic back in the 19th and early 20th centuries. I'm surprised there is not more to the article. My suggestion is to go with psychosexual disorder. J.R. Council (talk) 17:41, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Assignment 4- Psychosexual Disorders

Hey Group 9! One concern I have about the article Psychosexual disorder is the immediate definition of the term. The talk page reveals that this article was close to being deleted because how closely related paraphilia is with psychosexual disorders. I believe we need to define the subject in such a way that makes it different than paraphilia. Because not all psychosexual disorders are sexually preverted! I have found two helpful resources:

-This reference is a textbook that is available at the NDSU library, unfortunately not online. But it is a 2007, so a relatively recent and reliable source of information.

-This is an actual publication of Freud's work. It is kind of short, but we could pull some key points out of it.

Dr. Council, since this is such a broad topic, what are some main points you would suggest covering?Lex.schirado (talk) 17:18, 27 February 2016 (UTC)