Talk:Evolutionary approaches to depression

message: :Note: I didn't mean to mark the undoing of your edits as vandalism.  Damn mouse jumped as I was clicking. I have, however, undone your edits.  You can't claim that encyclopedia as a reference when you have not read the article.  For all either of us knows, it says the whole idea is silly and non-existant, or disproves the theory being pushed here. While I agree, if it stays, the article needs a more neutral name, that is not the only neutrality issue (so removing the tag was not appropriate). Nor should you just rename the article without discussing it or by just using the name taken from an article you haven't read.  Your renamed article was also not named properly by Wikipedia naming conventions. On an additional note, as you and I are the only ones talking about this, and it seems obvious we are not going to agree, I've submitted a request for a third opinion. AnmaFinotera (talk) 08:08, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No, the renaming was not "discussed" above, it was mentioned (and it was my first on this article and don't act like you never make mistakes). That is not a good encyclopedic name by Wikipedia naming conventions. If it were to be used, it should Evolutionary approaches to understanding depression, and we did not "agree" that it was a good name.  You just went ahead and did it, without even naming it properly.  Note: I've put this under the under discussion as it pertains to the areas of disagreement. AnmaFinotera (talk) 15:13, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  So do you want that title or not?  Colonel Warden (talk) 17:25, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No...I was just showing the problem with yours.  That one is kinda long, but I can't think of a shorter way to way it. AnmaFinotera (talk) 18:05, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  It is not my title - it is the title that I found in an existing encyclopedia.  It is the same length as the current title - five words - and you say yourself that it is more neutral.  Colonel Warden (talk) 10:48, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It is more neutral, yes, but that doesn't make it a great name. Different encyclopedias use different naming schemas. It is better than the current one, but I'd also like to explore other options before making the change.  Is evolution and depression discussed elsewhere in a neutral sense?  How do they refer to the topic? AnmaFinotera (talk) 15:35, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Renaming as [[Evolutionary Approaches to Understanding Depression]]

message: Per the plea posted at Wikipedia:Third opinion, here is what I think:
* The article's sources look okay to me, although I count only six authors, some cited multiple times.
* Neutrality doesn't mean one must present opposing views. An article about the theory of gravitation, for example, doesn't need opposing views; including them would be a violation of WP:UNDUE. Similarly, if opposing views for the subject of this article are difficult to find or otherwise not notable, then it is only necessary to include them in proportion to their value and acceptance by experts in the field.
* That said, it would be nice to see alternative approaches or points of view (not necessarily "opposition") written about this subject by other experts in the field. In that sense, the NPOV tag may be justified. I'd say leave it in.
* As for the "unencyclopedic" tag, I'd say take it out. Although I am unfamiliar with the subject, I think we assume that the subject isn't obscure in the field of mental health. We have articles on subject within my own professional field that others would consider obscure, but are still important subjects in my field. The same may be true here.
* I agree with renaming the article, although Wikipedia convention on article names says we capitalize only proper names. We don't use "title case" with every noun and verb capitalized.
Hope this helps. -Amatulić (talk) 20:10, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Third opinion

message: As a reader I also found this article interesting, informative and impressively well-referenced. I've read a bit about evolutionary psychology in the past (enough to realise that it's controversial and often speculative) but I don't remember reading anything about depression before. I'm not that keen on the current name either though. What about Evolutionary psychology of depression? Seems neutral and brief but precise. I'm not sure it's necessary or accurate to specify clinical depression in the title – as indicated currently in the last sentence of the "psychic pain hypothesis" section, clinical depression may be a dysfunctional extreme. Redirects can of course be created from other things people might search for, such as "evolutionary origins of depression" and less precise phrases like "evolution of depression", "evolution and depression" etc. Qwfp (talk) 18:49, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Article name

message: Should the Behavioral Shutdown Model be incorporated into this article, as well?
: Henriques, G. (year?). Depression: Disease or Behavioral Shutdown Mechanism?. Journal of Health and Science Policy
EPM (talk) 17:04, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added a section for this, as it happens to match my own preconceptions while the other models make no sense to me. Wnt (talk) 03:23, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Behavioral Shutdown Model

message: Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 10:14, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Excellent book that deals with this topic

message: For each of these theories, a critique ought to be added because every one of them sounds more fantastic then the previous one.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.189.253.245 (talk) 21:01, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Critique 

message: This is an article about a theory..and it doesn't look to be a theory of scientific consensus. In wikipedian terms it would be minority  viewpoint. The intro is in essay format and should be changed in style and also change to identify these facts and where the theory came from.--scuro (talk) 19:11, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: this is a minority viewpoint theory?

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Evolutionary approaches to depression. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070926114952/http://itb.biologie.hu-berlin.de/~hagen/papers/perinatal.pdf to http://itb.biologie.hu-berlin.de/~hagen/papers/perinatal.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:09, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified