the reasons i dont contribute to wikipedia anymore reversions like the one you just executed on the psychology template presuppose a knowledge of psychology i must imagine that if you don't understand why the template is inadequate then you have not the faintest idea of what constitutes pscyhology it is a an academic taught discipline b a research discipline c an applied discipline d a profession interest group and lobby e a property of of social perception or a folk psychology if you like and f an aspect of the humanities and the social sciences as well as a peer of psychiatry social work and in some respects occupational therapy g a contested political terrain which you would understand if a non amateur had written the articles on critical psychology and cultural historical psychology neither the template nor the main article bring out these distinctions instead what you have is a bad summary of a first year textbook of an american perspective on the psychodynamic post skinnerian model of psychology circa s having to explain this and to persuade you is hardly what someone with advanced expertise in the area wants to be doing on a saturday afternoon it is insulting demoralizing and a waste of time i imagine that the net sum of your expertise can probably be located at the lower end of a or e in which case you are probably enthuisiastic about your ignorance so thank you for giving me one more reason not to contribute to wikipedia the reasons i dont contribute to wikipedia anymore reversions like the one you just executed on the psychology template presuppose a knowledge of psychology i must imagine that if you don't understand why the template is inadequate then you have not the faintest idea of what constitutes pscyhology it is a an academic taught discipline b a research discipline c an applied discipline d a profession interest group and lobby e a property of of social perception or a folk psychology if you like and f an aspect of the humanities and the social sciences as well as a peer of psychiatry social work and in some respects occupational therapy g a contested political terrain which you would understand if a non amateur had written the articles on critical psychology and cultural historical psychology neither the template nor the main article bring out these distinctions instead what you have is a bad summary of a first year textbook of an american perspective on the psychodynamic post skinnerian model of psychology circa s having to explain this and to persuade you is hardly what someone with advanced expertise in the area wants to be doing on a saturday afternoon it is insulting demoralizing and a waste of time i imagine that the net sum of your expertise can probably be located at the lower end of a or e in which case you are probably enthuisiastic about your ignorance so thank you for giving me one more reason not to contribute to a phd from yale what absolute horseshit i have one from harvard and another from cambridge and if you have from yale i'd be curious where you bought it please do i notice you have had lots of these skirmishes wikipedia