Talk:List of psychotherapies

message: User:Bss5548 are making a lot of radical changes to the list. I'd like to see some explanation on these edits. __meco 21:59, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have restored the deletions . Many had been replaced by external links . I have made these Red Wikipedia links so that they can be identified as possible candiodates for articles.   Lumos3 22:30, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

text: To User:Bss5548 Please dont put external links within the article. If there is missing content on Wikipedia  leave a red link and then populate the article it points to with a stub which might contain that link as a reference or in its External links section. See Wikipedia:External links#Important points to remember Thanks . Lumos3 07:50, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Radical changes

message: I corrected the link to Child psychotherapy as there is such an article although it could be described as 'work in progress'. There is also a new article called attachment-based psychotherapy. Is it OK to add unvalidated, discredited and/or non-mainstream therapies if there are articles on them? Fainites barley 21:44, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: New additions

message: MOST OF THESE PSYCHOTHERAPEUTIC MODALITIES OFFER CERTIFICATIONS ON THEIR SITES. ADVERTS?
:The preceding comment was left on the article page by JamesClifton, so I moved it here. -DoctorW 04:48, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Adverts?

message: Is there a Giant Poster Chart and diagram showing visually and how all these schools are interrelated?  This would be very useful.  I would pay $20 for a poster with 100 schools of therapy and their links.  There are smaller charts of course all over showing the contrasts between say DBT and CBT and REBT etc.  
Can anybody make one, I don't mean an amateur but a Professor Emeritus of Psychology...
I know such a chart would have a subjective nature and there might be a variety of approaches but any would be useful.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.7.207.224 (talk) 13:11, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggested Addition:  Giant Poster-Sized Schools of Therapy Diagram 

message: There is currently a single explanatory footnote with a long list of references, probably added by . The large number of references seems excessive here. Just choose the best one (e.g., a review article). I will remove them all if someone else does not fix this.
Also, I am not convinced that 's decision to change the list's structure from alphabetical to categorical is, on balance, an improvement. I found it helpful to have an alphabetical index of all the articles on psychotherapies; that was not available anywhere else, whereas a categorization of psychotherapies is available elsewhere: in the main Psychotherapy article and in subcategories of :Category:Psychotherapy. Now there is no alphabetical index of psychotherapy articles, and I see that as a loss. I think it would be better to handle the categorization of psychotherapies in the main Psychotherapy article (where the categories can be more fully explained) and in :Category:Psychotherapy. I think it's a good idea to indicate which items are discredited/pseudoscience, but that could be done in an alphabetical listing by adding a special named  tag to each relevant item. Biogeographist (talk) 15:27, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Absolutely, no issues with trimming the citations. They were just the ones used on the NLP article.For the second issue - without additional information being added into the article, what you're describing is closer to an index rather than a list article. Perhaps we could instead add the "category"-type information in as annotations? Also, definitely happy with your proposed approach for pseudoscientific entries. --Xurizuri (talk) 12:34, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Explanatory footnote and alphabetical versus categorical structure 

message: * Technique or approach related to child psychotherapy
* Technique or approach related to psychodynamic psychotherapy and psychoanalysis
* Technique or approach related to family therapy
* Pseudoscientific or broadly discredited by professionals
* Technique or approach related to religion
* Technique or approach related to somatic psychology
Biogeographist (talk) 16:35, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Notes