within this discussion page i have sighted pseudo justification for the formatting and substance of the biopsych introductory paragraph quoting webster s dictionary clearly unless such source can be proven to be entirely free of advertorial motive then it ought not to be counted as a neutral source if as it appears that webster s dictionary is the primary source of the informative substance of the introductory article then surely webster s dictionary should be cited as being the source within the opening paragraph itself it is not proper to quote any source that has been approved merely on the basis of any unqualified assumption on the part of the current editors surely a far better way to proceed with the introductory paragraph would be to quote authoritative sources either from within the field of biopsych or otherwise having peer related relevance the impression that the introductory article presently creates is that of a messianic pharmaceutical cult seeking out of the blue to command the co operation of a wide range of medical and scientific disciplines before proposing changes to the introduction i would like the views of the current editors incidentally i neither have an anti psychiatry agenda nor am i a scientologist neither therefore am i aware of why the very mention of the word scientologist is met with such disdain within these pages