Talk:Attachment disorder/Archive 1

message: This article sounds like something from a parent's manual on attachment problems, not an encyclopedia article. I've listed it for cleanup. Quinnanya 16:32, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've completed your work and edited the material so it is more fitting.  I'd leave what you had marked as a good example of what the article is talking about.  JohnsonRon 17:57, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Style

message: The material previously deleted was not "stolen" as it is covered under fair use provisions of the copyright code.  But, more to the point, I hold the copyright to that article and I am allowed to use it as I see fit...although I have edited it some here. Dr. Art 22:57, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed, the issue was the indent. shotwell 13:59, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This article is much improved now.  It is much clearer and to the point.  Makes a good reference article.  RalphLendertalk 17:40, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Yes, the content is now excellent.  Good work all.  DPetersontalk 01:16, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add back material 

message: This is an interesting read, but it is not an encyclopedia article. Moreover, it lacks any citations whatsoever. shotwell 08:11, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia links don't count as references. Moreover, there are hardly any citations in this article at all. I suspect it is because most of it is a copied essay (with apparent permission) from somewhere else.  shotwell 17:20, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Anyone can clearly see that there are no citations. This article has portions such as this one "What are the underlying causes of these various symptoms? The cause is some break in the early attachment relationship that results in difficulties trusting others." Is that a widely held belief in the scientific community? Please don't remove the tag until this article is fully cited. shotwell 22:45, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

text: I see that you added some citations... still needs more. One thing I'd like to point out is that you've double listed the book that Dr. Becker-Weidman published with Wood ‘N’ Barnes. I'd fix it, but it seems like any changes I make to this article are instantly reverted. I also have two questions: Does Wood ‘N’ Barnes have a peer review process? I've never really seen that name in academic publishing. Also, shouldn't this article mention that Attachment Disorder isn't listed in the DSM? shotwell 02:15, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm going to try placing  tags once more so that I can make it clear about what I think needs a good reference. It seems like we're making a little progress here, so I hope that this doesn't get instantly reverted. From the other article we're working on, I see that you have the literature at hand and so I'm confident in your ability to support claims with references. Please understand that I'm not trying to destroy the article, I'm trying to help improve the article. Moreover, I have no way of verifying the claims if the references aren't made clear. shotwell 02:39, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, after placing a  tag on every unreferenced claim and previewing, the article really did look vandalized. The problem here is that this is just an essay written by Dr. Becker-Weidman that was copied over here to wikipedia. It needs to be wikified, sourced, carefully verified, and written with less POV phrasing. Later, I'll place the tags incrementally so that we can work together without totally destroying the readability of this article. shotwell 02:52, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I read a lot of Psychology books and texts...Wood & Barnes does send it's manuscripts out for peer-review before publication in a manner similiar to that of John Wiley and Sons, etc.  I think that too may citations and references make an article too choppy and hard to read.  I'd suggest citations for sections, where the section has one theme.  This article appears to have had input from many editors as I scan the edit history.  I will take a stab at some editing here...hope that's ok?  JonesRDtalk 20:14, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Oh, Attachment Disorder in not in the DSM IV-R TR, but is a term used, to some extent in the research lit.  Maybe it would be better to change the mention of AD to RAD?  Must read the article and see if that changes the meaning and thrust.  JonesRDtalk 20:18, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  This is an Essay 

message: What do you propose to add and where.  Please note what is new, edited, changed, or deleted, so that other editors can comment and consensus can be built. DPetersontalk 01:20, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: ''''PUT SUGGESTED SPEICFIC ADDITIONS HERE''''