This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Carl Hart. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 08:19, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
@ Atlantic306: why did you move this article to draft space? He clearly meets WP:N and while the article could use improvement I don't see why this can't be done in main space. Sizeofint ( talk) 00:11, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
This article has quite a number of primary sources, but there are quite a number of news articles that could be used as sources.
If you have any questions about swapping in WP:Secondary sources and/or editing the content based on the new sources, please let me know.
There are also a number of places where there was no citation, I added a citation needed tag. If you don't have sources, the content should be removed. Please see WP:BLP#Reliable sources.
It's quite an interesting article, by the way!-- CaroleHenson (talk) 10:28, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
This entire article is extremely biased in favor of the subject and his work/opinions/advocacy. It's not even trying to be subtle about it. It reads like a fan page, not an encyclopedia entry. Deepfrieddough ( talk) 14:12, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
You haven't explained which statements you're contesting or why you believe them to be wrong; just looks like you don't like his work, his conclusions, or him (or a combination of the foregoing), and that's not sufficient reason to flag the article. Marguerite.de.Valois.2000 ( talk) 13:50, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
I'm not a regular contributor, so sorry if I did something wrong. I didn't edit the article, but this sentence is flawed:
"This article is one example of his extensive research in drug addictions, and serves as a framework for looking at addiction as a disease rather than a crime."
It is under the section "Research", subsection "Developing Pharmacotherapies for Cannabis and Cocaine Use Disorders".
This is incorrect because Dr. Hart has been clear that he does not believe in the disease model of addiction, and instead subscribes to the life-process model of addiction, where rational alternatives can deter drug addicted behavior, and that it is not (an incurable) disease. He has himself done empirical work on what he calls "the myth of the irrational drug addict". I will link to proof of each claim I made below:
/info/en/?search=Disease_model_of_addiction
/info/en/?search=Life-process_model_of_addiction
http://drcarlhart.com/addiction-not-brain-disease/
https://www.thefix.com/dr-carl-hart-calling-addiction-brain-disease-promotes-harmful-drug-policies
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/20/drug-addicts-make-rational-choices_n_3955171.html
I would suggest not removing the sentence entirely, but changing it to the accurate statement by splitting it into three sentences: "This article is one example of his extensive research in drug addictions. It serves as a framework to treat addicted people as rational actors, not as criminals or people with a disease (Hart believes referring to addiction as a disease promotes harmful drug policies, and does not believe addiction is a brain disease). However, Dr. Hart does recognize the individual need in some cases for pharmacological aid in breaking addictive behaviors."
Of course, add the little notations with my links above if you edit it...I don't think I should.
Lastly, I think it would be sort of wrong in some way to just cut the sentence to the shortened one that starts the three I submit above. Just leaving it at "this article is one example of his extensive research in drug addictions", is leaving out the part about NOT treating drug addicted people as criminals, which is essential to the point of the article. However, since the assumption was to treat it as a disease, then it is important (just because of such an assumption) to mention he does NOT think of it that way, and instead lends credence to a minority theory, which runs somewhat counter or in opposition to the most popularly held theory, the disease model. You could link "rational actors" to the "life-process model" article too, but that might be unnecessary. I don't need this part to promote the opposed theory, just show, with integrity, that one exists. The assumption of treating it as a disease shows how important such empirically backed minority views are in science, especially concerning our current opioid problem. Whether or not you agree with his model, it is scientific to give it voice here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:5B0:45C7:9568:ED30:3C2C:2C6A:9A0 ( talk) 22:09, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
I see this has yet to be corrected or debated. It requires attention still. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:5B0:45C9:A1E8:E800:C8FA:D0D2:550B ( talk) 21:21, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
Hart was featured in The Independent's article " What does the poster boy for drug misuse really look like?". However, the article has a paywall. Hopefully, a Wikipedia editor who is also a subscriber of The Independent can add information to Hart's Wikipedia article. -- Jollibinay ( talk) 05:29, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
Dr.Swag Lord, Ph.d: Can you provide some detail on the "wording that promotes the subject in a subjective manner without imparting real information" that you found in this article? Thanks! -- Tsavage ( talk) 20:46, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
He is particularly interested in what social and psychological factors influence self-administration of drugs.[8] He uses his research as a scientific basis for his presentations on the importance of decriminalizing drugs. He cites the criminalization of crack cocaine (typically associated with black communities) and lack of similar criminalization of powder cocaine (traditionally associated with white communities) as an example of how drug criminalization has been based on social problems rather than scientific fact.[12] this work provides scientific evidence to debunk the myths about hard drugs, and to work toward more lenient and humane policies.--Sourced to a magazine run by Hart's alma mater, a Ted Talk made by Hart, and a book written by Hart
Hart's research acknowledges structural injustices, but also plays into an oppression analysis perspective of psychology. His research in some ways mirrors the work of Martin Seligman. Seligman did research on dogs, later used as a human model, finding that dogs placed in a situation where they cannot escape pain learn helplessness and lose the ability to escape when the option is reopened to them.[21] Hart's research has similar tones: he indicates a lack of positive outlets and activities as a reason for drug use in communities. His work differs in acknowledging the extreme structural injustices that further oppress and imprison black people. He uses his research to argue that laws intended to make a society safer based on empirical evidence, rather than an oppressive legal system that promotes white supremacy, will move us closer to justice-- sourced to Hart's Ted Talk (and a book that has nothing to do with Hart (i.e., WP:SYNTH)
Decriminalization of drug use and alternative policies that emphasize effective treatments are called for.--sourced to a paper co-written by Hart
This article is one example of his extensive research in drug addictions, and serves as a framework for looking at addiction as a disease rather than a crime.-- Unsourced, but the previous citations were again to a paper co-written by Hart
Hart is working to expose racism embedded in drug laws and to decriminalize drug use through policies that are scientifically based rather than heavily influenced by social determinants of the era--sourced to a ref that has nothing to do with Hart, and a ref to Hart's own website
He also uses the intersection of his understanding about the systemic racism inherent in drug criminalization, in combination with his extensive knowledge about drugs, to combat mainstream stories which perpetuate myths of black (and other minority) inferiority--sourced to Hart's own website
... with the hope that scientifically grounded research will trump the racist policies currently in place, and decrease the unjust incarceration and punishment of black communities for drug use.--Unsourced
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Carl Hart. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 08:19, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
@ Atlantic306: why did you move this article to draft space? He clearly meets WP:N and while the article could use improvement I don't see why this can't be done in main space. Sizeofint ( talk) 00:11, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
This article has quite a number of primary sources, but there are quite a number of news articles that could be used as sources.
If you have any questions about swapping in WP:Secondary sources and/or editing the content based on the new sources, please let me know.
There are also a number of places where there was no citation, I added a citation needed tag. If you don't have sources, the content should be removed. Please see WP:BLP#Reliable sources.
It's quite an interesting article, by the way!-- CaroleHenson (talk) 10:28, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
This entire article is extremely biased in favor of the subject and his work/opinions/advocacy. It's not even trying to be subtle about it. It reads like a fan page, not an encyclopedia entry. Deepfrieddough ( talk) 14:12, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
You haven't explained which statements you're contesting or why you believe them to be wrong; just looks like you don't like his work, his conclusions, or him (or a combination of the foregoing), and that's not sufficient reason to flag the article. Marguerite.de.Valois.2000 ( talk) 13:50, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
I'm not a regular contributor, so sorry if I did something wrong. I didn't edit the article, but this sentence is flawed:
"This article is one example of his extensive research in drug addictions, and serves as a framework for looking at addiction as a disease rather than a crime."
It is under the section "Research", subsection "Developing Pharmacotherapies for Cannabis and Cocaine Use Disorders".
This is incorrect because Dr. Hart has been clear that he does not believe in the disease model of addiction, and instead subscribes to the life-process model of addiction, where rational alternatives can deter drug addicted behavior, and that it is not (an incurable) disease. He has himself done empirical work on what he calls "the myth of the irrational drug addict". I will link to proof of each claim I made below:
/info/en/?search=Disease_model_of_addiction
/info/en/?search=Life-process_model_of_addiction
http://drcarlhart.com/addiction-not-brain-disease/
https://www.thefix.com/dr-carl-hart-calling-addiction-brain-disease-promotes-harmful-drug-policies
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/20/drug-addicts-make-rational-choices_n_3955171.html
I would suggest not removing the sentence entirely, but changing it to the accurate statement by splitting it into three sentences: "This article is one example of his extensive research in drug addictions. It serves as a framework to treat addicted people as rational actors, not as criminals or people with a disease (Hart believes referring to addiction as a disease promotes harmful drug policies, and does not believe addiction is a brain disease). However, Dr. Hart does recognize the individual need in some cases for pharmacological aid in breaking addictive behaviors."
Of course, add the little notations with my links above if you edit it...I don't think I should.
Lastly, I think it would be sort of wrong in some way to just cut the sentence to the shortened one that starts the three I submit above. Just leaving it at "this article is one example of his extensive research in drug addictions", is leaving out the part about NOT treating drug addicted people as criminals, which is essential to the point of the article. However, since the assumption was to treat it as a disease, then it is important (just because of such an assumption) to mention he does NOT think of it that way, and instead lends credence to a minority theory, which runs somewhat counter or in opposition to the most popularly held theory, the disease model. You could link "rational actors" to the "life-process model" article too, but that might be unnecessary. I don't need this part to promote the opposed theory, just show, with integrity, that one exists. The assumption of treating it as a disease shows how important such empirically backed minority views are in science, especially concerning our current opioid problem. Whether or not you agree with his model, it is scientific to give it voice here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:5B0:45C7:9568:ED30:3C2C:2C6A:9A0 ( talk) 22:09, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
I see this has yet to be corrected or debated. It requires attention still. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:5B0:45C9:A1E8:E800:C8FA:D0D2:550B ( talk) 21:21, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
Hart was featured in The Independent's article " What does the poster boy for drug misuse really look like?". However, the article has a paywall. Hopefully, a Wikipedia editor who is also a subscriber of The Independent can add information to Hart's Wikipedia article. -- Jollibinay ( talk) 05:29, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
Dr.Swag Lord, Ph.d: Can you provide some detail on the "wording that promotes the subject in a subjective manner without imparting real information" that you found in this article? Thanks! -- Tsavage ( talk) 20:46, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
He is particularly interested in what social and psychological factors influence self-administration of drugs.[8] He uses his research as a scientific basis for his presentations on the importance of decriminalizing drugs. He cites the criminalization of crack cocaine (typically associated with black communities) and lack of similar criminalization of powder cocaine (traditionally associated with white communities) as an example of how drug criminalization has been based on social problems rather than scientific fact.[12] this work provides scientific evidence to debunk the myths about hard drugs, and to work toward more lenient and humane policies.--Sourced to a magazine run by Hart's alma mater, a Ted Talk made by Hart, and a book written by Hart
Hart's research acknowledges structural injustices, but also plays into an oppression analysis perspective of psychology. His research in some ways mirrors the work of Martin Seligman. Seligman did research on dogs, later used as a human model, finding that dogs placed in a situation where they cannot escape pain learn helplessness and lose the ability to escape when the option is reopened to them.[21] Hart's research has similar tones: he indicates a lack of positive outlets and activities as a reason for drug use in communities. His work differs in acknowledging the extreme structural injustices that further oppress and imprison black people. He uses his research to argue that laws intended to make a society safer based on empirical evidence, rather than an oppressive legal system that promotes white supremacy, will move us closer to justice-- sourced to Hart's Ted Talk (and a book that has nothing to do with Hart (i.e., WP:SYNTH)
Decriminalization of drug use and alternative policies that emphasize effective treatments are called for.--sourced to a paper co-written by Hart
This article is one example of his extensive research in drug addictions, and serves as a framework for looking at addiction as a disease rather than a crime.-- Unsourced, but the previous citations were again to a paper co-written by Hart
Hart is working to expose racism embedded in drug laws and to decriminalize drug use through policies that are scientifically based rather than heavily influenced by social determinants of the era--sourced to a ref that has nothing to do with Hart, and a ref to Hart's own website
He also uses the intersection of his understanding about the systemic racism inherent in drug criminalization, in combination with his extensive knowledge about drugs, to combat mainstream stories which perpetuate myths of black (and other minority) inferiority--sourced to Hart's own website
... with the hope that scientifically grounded research will trump the racist policies currently in place, and decrease the unjust incarceration and punishment of black communities for drug use.--Unsourced