Talk:Déjà vu

message: Editors, please review: WP:MEDRS, MOS:MED, and WP:NPOV.
This article minimizes accepted knowledge about déjà vu, even discounting it, while presenting speculation, single studies, popular material, and fringe theories. Reliable medical sources are needed and will guide a more neutral point of view, copy editing and fringe material that should be cut. 
I removed statements and some language which marginalized déjà vu in epilepsy as rising from seizure activity in the brain, then presented isolated research and speculation as conventional knowledge. The word "pathological" (and "non-pathological") carries connotations used here seemingly as a persuasive device. It is sufficient to say déjà vu is a symptom of epileptic auras in some people with epilepsy or similarly.
The Pharmacology section revolves around a report of a single case and speculation by those authors. This section can only exist based on appropriate reliable medical sources, presenting unbiased reviews and medical consensus.
The Dream based explanation subsection is completely based on a popular book (or so cited) and should not be in a section with other explanations from medical publications, if allowed at all. Lohff may be a psychologist but his Dream Directory is not a reliable medical source.
This article is written like a term paper and not an encyclopedia article. Generally and widely, it is built from materials which are not reliable medical sources.
Lastly, isn't 100 days is too short for archiving? — βox73 (৳alk) 12:54, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Medical sourcing & neutrality issues 

message: Carl Sagan supported the idea that deja vu is precognition. Susanj96 (talk) 17:12, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: No its not trust me ... 2400:ADCC:11D:5400:8517:5FE0:D970:DD3D (talk) 20:42, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

text: it'not fake it's damn true i generally face it every month 2409:40D4:1A:5EFA:8000:0:0:0 (talk) 17:22, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deja Vu 

message: Are there more recent studies that have come out concerning déjà vu experiences and how they are related to memory. There were a few examples mentioned within the article. Nevertheless, is the topic still being investigated? Voll2020 (talk) 23:09, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Studies Concerning Déjà vu  

message: It is sometimes said that Déjà vu is also known as identifying paramnesia.. Brian Inglis (Science and Parascience, Hodder, 1984, p.230, sorry about the unreliable source) suggested rather that identifying paramnesia was a psychological hypothesis put forward to explain the experience of déjà vu. Herman N. Sno (1991. "The deja vu experience: Remembrance of things past?", American Journal of Psychiatry 147(12):1587-95. DOI:10.1176/ajp.147.12.1587) makes a clear distinction between the two, noting that there are two forms of deja vu and that one author has associated the stronger form with reduplicative paramnesia. Can anybody clarify the current understanding, and might Sno's paper be worth citing in the article? — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 11:54, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Identifying paramnesia 

message: What is it 94.69.100.80 (talk) 21:11, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you thinking of jamais vu? Schazjmd (talk) 21:13, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is the opposite of deja Vu 

message: This article doesn't address the vague feeling of "déjà vu" in cases where one remembers actual people, places and/or situations that one has experienced before while not being able to recall the extract details, time or other circumstances.
-- T71024 (talk) 10:56, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have any reliable sources describing such events, which we could cite? I agree that the term is also used to describe the same feeling, whether it accompanies a false or genuine half-memory. But Wikipedia policy demands sources for what we add, and I know of none that are sufficiently reliable. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 12:33, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Casual déjà vu 

message: Why déjà vu occurs? 106.0.54.219 (talk) 20:00, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Déjà vu 

message: As mentioned by @Box73 above, this article has a lot of issues in terms of sources, neutrality, and bias. I'm not an expert on déjà vu (I've only really started looking into the phenomenon relatively recently), but I think it's worth trying to shape this page up, especially since the phenomenon has a decent body of literature on it outside of pure speculation.
I'm fairly new to Wikipedia, so please forgive me if I am going about this wrong, but I think the following sections of the article need attention:
• The etymology section is extremely short, and may not be accurate. According to Alan Brown in his 2003 paper A Review of the Déjà Vu Experience, the exact origin of the term is ambiguous and contested. The history of déjà vu research and records of its existence throughout history are also not mentioned, nor prior definitions of the term. I believe this section could be significantly improved by changing it from "Etymology" to "History".
• As mentioned by @Box73, the pharmacology section is based entirely on a single case study, and cites only the case study itself directly. (I added a second case study prior to learning about Wikipedia's policy on primary sources, whoops). It also treats the case study as proving a pharmacological link between déjà vu and a combination of amantadine and phenylpropanolamine, which isn't really accurate. I believe this section should be removed.
• The explanations section of the article gives significantly more attention to the implicit memory explanation than others, which is likely due to bias. There are also some explanations that have not been mentioned, such as the theory that déjà vu is caused by seizure activity in the section of the brain responsible for the feeling of familiarity (which appears to only be mentioned as an implication in the "Mental disorders" section of the article). I believe adding additional detail in the other explanations (and possibly reducing the immense detail of the implicit memory section) may be necessary to present all the main theories behind the phenomenon and provide unbiased views.
I intend to try improving on the article in logical increments, but as I'm still new to editing on Wikipedia and not an expert on the subject matter, I felt it necessary to solicit further discussion about the topic rather than trying to immediately edit the article radically. If more experienced Wikipedians see this and are willing to comment, discussion would be appreciated.
Yossipossi (talk) 03:46, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Improving this page 

message: Why people fall in deja vu? 103.248.94.31 (talk) 11:15, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why people fall in deja vu 

message: — Assignment last updated by TheOneCheese (talk) 19:26, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Introduction to Psychology Honors