Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Psychopathology

message: I have a question:  What exactly does this project do that Wikipedia:WikiProject Medical Conditions does not do?  I'm a big fan of WikiProjects, but I don't actually know what this would do to enhance the topics.  Of course I do not have a deep knowledge of the subject as many other people might, so I would love to be enlightened. -- Ram-Man
Largely, because this serves as a way for people interested in this particular area to focus, gather and discuss. Since much of the professional world is organised in this way (for example psychiatrists and psychologists having specialist knowledge in this area) it would be beneficial to have this reflected on Wikipedia. Also, Wikipedia:WikiProject Medical Conditions aims to describe the diagnoses, prognoses and treatments for medical conditions. For example, entries for anti-psychiatry (movement), James Tilly Matthews (person), hallucination (sensory distortion, not necessarily medical) and Martha Mitchell effect (concept) do not seem to fit very well under these WikiProject Medical Conditions headings, despite the fact they are all relevant to psychopathology. Just aiming for a 'birds of a feather' effect really. -- Vaughan
Clinical depression needs another review. It's got all fuzzy from too much editing to-and-fro and has accumulated some strange things (some of which I have just removed). In particular, the whole Unipolar-Bipolar-Manic Depression set of distinctions is no longer being made clearly. -- The Anome 08:52, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is this project about? 

message: I realise that I am new here but the categories don't make a lot of sense to me.  If we take health science and work down from there we find it has three subcategories, one of which is medicine. Medicine then has a subcategory Psychiatry - so far so good. Psychiatry then has four subcategories: addiction (wouldn't substance use/abuse be a better category title?), mental illness, then two treatment modalities of psychiatric medication and psychotherapy. At this point we are starting to get wooly. If we follow mental illness we find that psychiatry is a subcategory (so the hierachy goes medicine-psychiatry-mental illness-psychiatry)! We also have a mixture of specific illnesses and broad categories.  Mood disorders is one subcategory but so is mania, which really should be a subcategory of mood disorders. We have one treatment modality of Psychiatric medication - yet again. If we follow mood disorders we get no subcategories. If we follow anxiety disorder we get anxiolytics and phobias as subcategories with anxiolytics having a subcategory of benzodiazepines which itself has a subcategory of imidazopyridines. If we follow psychiatric medication we get antidepressants and antipsychotics.
I could go on.  The point is that the categories are not very systematic and are at times circular. Some subcategories don't belong where they are and many reasonable subcategories are missing. It would seem that a good start to the psychopathology project would be to sort out the framework of categories. Is there a group that is responsible for this sort of organisation? I am reluctant to change things as I am not really sure how to go about it.
Below is a suggested tree which has partly come from the DSM and partly out of my head so please excuse any glaring oversights:
:Medicine
::Psychiatry (and the others, most of which I will omit)
::Military medicine (these two given as examples)
:::Military psychiatry (also a subcategory of psychiatry)
::Aviation medicine (these two given as examples)
:::Aviation psychiatry (also a subcategory of psychiatry)
:::Psychiatric symptoms
:::Psychiatric signs
:::Mental disorders
::::Child and adolescent mental disorders
::::Organic mental disorders
::::Mental disorders due to a general medical condition
::::Substance-related disorders
::::Psychotic disorders
::::Mood disorders
::::Anxiety disorders
::::Somatoform disorders
::::Factitious disorders
::::Dissociative disorders
::::Sexual and gender identity disorders
::::Eating disorders
::::Sleep disorders
::::Impulse-control disorders
::::Adjustment disorders
::::Uncommon psychiatric disorders (an additional category for all the rare disorders e.g Capgras syndrome would be in this category and under psychotic disorders)
:::Personality disorders
::::Cluster A PDs
::::Cluster B PDs
::::Cluster C PDs
::::PDs not otherwise specified
:::Other conditions for focus
:::Mental disorder assessment
::::Brain imaging
::::Other psychiatric investigations
::::Psychological testing
:::Mental disorder treatments
::::Prevention of mental disorers
::::Psychiatric hospitals
::::Community psychiatric treatments
::::Psychiatric nursing
::::Physical psychiatric treatments
:::::ECT
:::::Neurosurgery
::::Psychopharmacology
:::::Antipsychotics
:::::Antidepresants
:::::Mood stabilisers
:::::Anxiolytics
:::::Miscellaneous psychiatric medications
::::Psychotherapies
::::Psychiatric social work
::::Psychiatric occupational therapy
:::Transcultural psychiatry
:::Liaison psychiatry
:::Forensic psychiatry
:::Military psychiatry (also a subcategory of military medicine)
:::Aviation psychiatry (also a subcategory of aviation medicine)
Not exhaustive but it is a framework on which we could hang our articles as well as pointing out deficiencies in terms of articles that need writing. What do people think? Please add/edit the tree as you see fit. I do not as yet feel confident to create such a tree and then migrate current articles to a new classification. I have also put this list in Wikipedia:WikiProject_Clinical_medicine/categorizations so perhaps it is best to discuss it there.--CloudSurfer 09:18, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I have also edited this list to remove plurals to be consistent with the naming convention. Please comment on or edit the list at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Clinical_medicine/categorizations. In the absence of comment so far I have started to implement parts of this tree. --CloudSurfer 18:20, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Categories 

message: I have just reread the article Wikipedia:Cite sources which documents the style method recommended for Wikipedia. It uses the (author, year) method, not numbered references as is used in the Schizophrenia article and indeed as I have used when writing articles. Time to rethink, methinks. --CloudSurfer 09:32, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I have unilaterally done a rewrite to the structure section of the main page. I think it covers the current Wikipedia style views. Please see what you think and edit it to your preferences or discuss it here first. Trying to do references by name and year is a better way than numbered footnotes which can easily get out of synch. We should try to keep numbered footnotes to a minimum for that reason alone. --CloudSurfer 04:00, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: :Hello.
:Many of you may have read on your talk pages (especially the 2000 top contributors) about multi-licencing, that is, using both Creative Commons and FDL licences.
:I know there are several very good psychology and psychopathology Wiki sites that would benefit from this multi-licencing, especially those that follow a Wiki philosophy and haven't much content of their own.
:I would like to know more about how it specifically affects members of this WikiProject and what their stance is, particularly those who play the role of administrators. I understand this is a user decision, not necessarily a WikiProject decision.
:My stance? I am in favour of the Creative Commons licence. I took this decision on December the 11th 2004.
:Please let me know about your stances. I hope we can have a fruitful discussion about this.
::Thank you very much. I will answer lots of questions and respect all your decisions.
::EuropracBHIT 10:31, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Multi-licencing: Creative Commons and FDL

message: == Unethical experiments using psychiatric patients ==
: Dear Sirs of Wikipedia Psychopathology,
I would like to request a section or article about unethical experiments using psychiatric patients; and i would suggest something about recent experiments, like those shown in Robert Whitaker`s book "Mad In America" (Chapter 10 The Nuremberg Code Doesn`t Apply Here). 
I am not proposing sensationalism, but only the coverage of unethical experiments that have actually been performed, and are probably still being performed, in countries like the USA. 
I would like something like an investigative enquiry about this issue, involving simultaneously aspects of human rights, ethics in research, psychiatry and also science.
I insist i am not proposing sensationalism.
Wikipedia has already articles about MKULTRA , Project CHATTER, Project BLUEBIRD, Project ARTICHOKE, MKNAOMI, Tuskegee syphilis study, Louis Joylon West, etc, so why not cover this ?
Examples of the mentioned experiments are:
: - Giving hallucinogen drugs to patients suffering from hallucinations and delusions;
: - Giving stimulant drugs to patients undergoing episodes of acute mania;
: - Giving neuroleptic drugs (that are toxic and don`t have any healing power) to underage minors not displaying any psychiatric symptoms, for years and years, only because they have older siblings diagnosed with psychosis, with the excuse of "preventing psychosis".
Thank you for your attention,
Alberto
:Hi Alberto
:This sounds like an excellent idea, although perhaps a comprehensive article on the ethics of psychiatric research, rather than simply listing the unethical research which has taken place, might make for a more balanced (and interesting) article.
: - Vaughan 12:53, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  2005 

message: : Dear Sirs of Wikipedia Psychopathology,
I would like to request a section or article about unethical experiments using psychiatric patients; and i would suggest something about recent experiments, like those shown in Robert Whitaker`s book "Mad In America" (Chapter 10 The Nuremberg Code Doesn`t Apply Here). 
I am not proposing sensationalism, but only the coverage of unethical experiments that have actually been performed, and are probably still being performed, in countries like the USA. 
I would like something like an investigative enquiry about this issue, involving simultaneously aspects of human rights, ethics in research, psychiatry and also science.
I insist i am not proposing sensationalism.
Wikipedia has already articles about MKULTRA , Project CHATTER, Project BLUEBIRD, Project ARTICHOKE, MKNAOMI, Tuskegee syphilis study, Louis Joylon West, etc, so why not cover this ?
Examples of the mentioned experiments are:
: - Giving hallucinogen drugs to patients suffering from hallucinations and delusions;
: - Giving stimulant drugs to patients undergoing episodes of acute mania;
: - Giving neuroleptic drugs (that are toxic and don`t have any healing power) to underage minors not displaying any psychiatric symptoms, for years and years, only because they have older siblings diagnosed with psychosis, with the excuse of "preventing psychosis".
Thank you for your attention,
Alberto
:Hi Alberto
:This sounds like an excellent idea, although perhaps a comprehensive article on the ethics of psychiatric research, rather than simply listing the unethical research which has taken place, might make for a more balanced (and interesting) article.
: - Vaughan 12:53, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unethical experiments using psychiatric patients 

message: The article Psychotherapy is currently nominated to be improved on on Wikipedia:This week's improvement drive. If you are interested you can vote for it there.--Fenice 13:43, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Improvement Drive

message: Hello,
Please notice this project. 
I hope that the List of publications in philosophy and List of publications in psychology will be adopted by the psychopathology project.
Thanks,APH 06:53, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Science pearls| Science pearls]]

message: Hi! I'm working on trying to improve Swedish wikipedias articles on psychopathology, right now I'm working on translating the excellent schizophrenia article.  I have two questions:
# I wonder what people have thought about including DSM criteria in articles, in terms of copyright.  Could this be a problem, or is it justified quotation?  
# The criterias often do not flow very well in the main text - how about putting them in floating boxes on the side, as is often seen in textbooks?
/Skagedal 16:55, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  About DSM criteria 

message: Hi, I'm a member of the Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team, which is looking to identify quality articles in Wikipedia for future publication on CD or paper. We recently began assessing using these criteria, and we are looking for A-class, B-class, and Good articles, with no POV or copyright problems. Can you recommend any suitable articles? Please post your suggestions here. Cheers, Shanel 20:33, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Articles for the Wikipedia 1.0 project

message: Just as heads-up, there is a somewhat related project, Pedophilia Article Watch in existance. We aren't on your line of descent (our ultimate parent is the Sociology project), but some of material intersects with your (although a good amount of the material we deal with is political). As you might image we are very busy, and as our name implies we are busy trying to keep bias out of our articles. Help is always needed and wanted! Herostratus 17:38, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sister project 

message: Psychosis is up for a featured article review. Detailed concerns may be found here. Please leave your comments and help us address and maintain this article's featured quality. Sandy 22:52, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Psychosis]]

message: Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory.  This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you.  B2T2 00:19, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Project directory 

message: Beginning cross-post.
:See Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team#Stablepedia. If you wish to comment, please comment there. ★TWO YEARS OF MESSEDROCKER★ 03:47, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stablepedia 

message: Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention.  Badbilltucker 18:17, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia Day Awards 

message: == Articles for Deletion: Mental Health Association of San Francisco ==
:: --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 16:33, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  updated --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 23:25, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  2007 

message: :: --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 16:33, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  updated --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 23:25, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Articles for Deletion: Mental Health Association of San Francisco 

message: Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Rorschach test images. Should Rorschach test display all ten images used in the test and the common responses, or should we act on psychologists' concerns that doing so undermines the test? SlimVirgin talk|contribs 17:06, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  RfC on the Rorschach test: fresh eyes needed 

message: Hello psychopathology experts.  Is this old Afc submission about a notable topic?  Should it be kept or deleted as a stale draft?  —Anne Delong (talk) 02:24, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Emotional amoral egoism]]