Talk:Joseph Nicolosi

message: Reparative Therapy of Male Homosexuality was created by a recently banned sock-puppet and the book, the discredited ideas of one man, is longer than the man's article. What remains notable should go under one article. GPinkerton (talk) 18:44, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: , I don't disagree, but I think this should probably be the target as it wasn't his only book. Guy (help!) 20:33, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  That's what I'm proposing! Merge the book(s) into the man. GPinkerton (talk) 22:11, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

text: Crossroads, that sounds about right. But based on this edit by one of his old sockpuppets, he claims to have been victim of reparative therapy and that he has a vendetta against the freudian theories. Perhaps he holds some deep seated sympathy towards such theories and has relapsed in his belief about it, or he merely wanted to pretend he hated freudian theories to add a false sense of credibility to edits. Another one of his sockpuppets was titled 'Born Gay' which to me sounds like someone putting on a mask so they won't be questioned... given his editing history and all. --Sxologist (talk) 11:16, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: , I cannot recall any gay person I know who has ever called themselves "a homosexual". Only rarely have I heard them say "I am homosexual". It is very sad reading - but Wikipedia is not therapy. Guy (help!) 21:57, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  based on the ANI on him, he once wrote: “for the record, I do not now, and nor have I ever, believed that I was 'born gay' - my actual views on that topic are about the exact opposite of what my user name would suggest". The intent of the sock was to present a "new, more politically correct guise (calling myself "Born Gay", and so forth), [so that] no one would be smart enough to realize who I was," clearly an intent to deceive and to advance an agenda. Sxologist (talk) 23:00, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with ''[[Reparative Therapy of Male Homosexuality]]'' 

message: The first sentence of this article is: Joseph Nicolosi (January 24, 1947 – March 8, 2017) was an American clinical psychologist who advocated and practised "reparative therapy", a form of the pseudoscientific treatment of conversion therapy that he claimed could help people overcome or mitigate their homosexual desires and replace them with heterosexual ones.
I had edited the sentence to read: Joseph Nicolosi (January 24, 1947 – March 8, 2017) was an American clinical psychologist who advocated and practised "reparative therapy", a form of conversion therapy that he claimed could help people overcome or mitigate their homosexual desires and replace them with heterosexual ones.
Nfitz made a good faith removal of my edit (diff), stating, "not sure why is trying to remove same text that banned sockpuppets tried to remove". Two points: (1) I edited the sentence for this reason, as I stated in my edit note: "grammar/usage - clarity of expression". This part of the sentence: "a form of the pseudoscientific treatment of conversion therapy" is (a) duplicative and unnecessary, since the last sentence of the first paragraph emphasizes the pseudoscientific nature of conversion therapies, including "reparative therapy" (as does the wikilinked conversion therapy article); and (b) the sentence is not clear and concise. To avoid back-and-forth edits, I will leave the sentence as is, although I encourage another editor to edit it to make it more clear and concise. ¶ Along with other editors, I had many discussions with FreeKnowledgeCreator (the sockpuppet) about his attempts to sanitize Nicolosi's book (Reparative Therapy of Male Homosexuality) and present it as acceptable theory. I have no interest whatsoever in minimizing the harmful nature of conversion therapies.    - Mark D Worthen PsyD (talk) (I'm a man—traditional male pronouns are fine.) 18:52, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with you Mark, I will give it a look when I have some time but grammatically speaking, you are correct. Sxologist (talk) 07:51, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  First sentence of article 

message: I seek attention about this changes by User:Sxologist. 116.58.201.111 (talk) 03:42, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I replied to both of your complaints you may on two different administrator noticeboards - it's really not a good look when you escalate things that fast simply because I reverted your low-grade edits. I'll copy my main points here too: First, you removed the required WP:FRINGE notices from Medical Associations, made drastic edits to a page that are not required, used primary/original sources instead of reputable secondary ones, added a fringe source (Joseph Nicolosi). You could learn how to use Wikipedia – you could actually get some commentary on Nicolosi's views from the Bailey 2016 review linked in the article, because that's a reputable secondary source. Will you though? Sxologist (talk) 04:50, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

text: Good revert. You are right to follow WP:FRINGE. Just be careful about throwing around the term "vandalism" - it does not apply to WP:PROFRINGE POV pushing. See WP:NOTVAND. Crossroads -talk- 20:51, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion 

message: Pinging  and  what do you think about the section of Nicolosi's publications? I don't really know if WP:FRINGE applies here, but I believe they may have been added by our favourite now-banned sockpuppet. I'm not really in the business of silencing  silly opinions I don't agree with, but Nicolosi didn't use the scientific method nor did he hold post at a university or institute.  Perhaps it could just be shortened to his books? For example, the meta analysis is published in Psychological Reports (a pay-to-publish journal that published Paul Cameron). What do you think? Side note: I took a look at the patent for "reintegrative therapy" that Nicolosi filed with his son before his death, and the diagrams are nothing short of hilarious (and sad). See here, here, and here. I really don't understand the American system, you can file any old pseudoscience as a medical treatment. Sxologist (talk) 13:18, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Apparently, homosexuality can be cured by making your bar graphs look like boobs. --Nat Gertler (talk) 14:39, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I made a couple of edits (diff). I would leave the bibliography as it is. Psychological Reports is not a highly respected journal, but it's legitimate. It is not pay-to-publish. See journals.sagepub.com/author-instructions/PRX. Mark D Worthen PsyD (talk) [he/his/him] 02:53, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. No problem. Just to comment; I don't know if it still is, but I know it used to charge a 'per page' fee. Either way that's probably not quite pay to publish as you say. Sxologist (talk) 04:00, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Publications / bibliography