As far as pointing you to the main users, I've already pointed them to your thread at the Schizophrenia article. As I said, the Psych area of Wiki is very weak, but in terms of those of us who write featured articles, Eubulides ( talk · contribs) works on autism-related articles and many others, Casliber ( talk · contribs) works on schizophrenia and others (he is currently working to bring major depressive disorder up to speed, so your crosspost there wasn't needed), I work on Tourette syndrome and others, Fainites ( talk · contribs) works on reactive attachment disorder, etc. I've put out the word, but unless the Psych Project miraculously gets stronger, WP:MED will be a good, central place, and I've already posted there. [1] If that doesn't yield something, I'll point you in some other directions tomorrow. I'm not on the West Coast, so it's past my bedtime :-) SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 04:36, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
Mindsite, I have your page watchlisted, so we can communicate here. Your proposal should go in a subpage, which can be transcluded to other places. If you give me a suggested (brief) title, I'll set the page up for you. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 20:38, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Also, you may want to examine these two categories:
along with a description of the assessment ratings:
SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 20:43, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi there, and thank you for your message. There are several points I'd like to see clarified:
Best wishes, Fvasconcellos ( t· c) 22:32, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Interesting. I think the what is best for wikipedia is being able to list the criteria here (under Fair Use) on the respective wikipedia page on the article, and then referring to the reference for more information. The descriptive body of text would not be needed but can be referred to I guess. Sorry, I have been busy with other things and not read teh discussion so far. I will try to get up to speed above. Cheers, Casliber ( talk · contribs) 23:05, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Jolly useful. I think all of your suggestions for use above have their place. Fainites barley 23:35, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
I made this change to try out using citations to Mindsite from Autism (instead of to Behavenet, which has just the diagnostic criteria). Here is the sample citation. Note that it cites just the diagnostic criteria, not the whole page:
Here is what it looks like:
{{
cite book}}
: |access-date=
requires |url=
(
help); External link in |chapterurl=
(
help); Unknown parameter |chapterurl=
ignored (|chapter-url=
suggested) (
help)Does this look good? Any further suggestions for citation format?
Anyway, some comments:
Eubulides ( talk) 23:56, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Being a laissez-faire person, I added your site to the External Links list for the MDD article. It will stay there unless we hear from APA that your use of DSM-IV-TR is not legitimate. Also, as other people here noted you would want to make it explicit on your site that you are using DSM-IV-TR. (It implicitly follows from the copyright dates.) Good luck! Paul Gene ( talk) 09:57, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
My biggest concern about any edit to an article is whether the articles benefits from said change. This concern is intensified in reaction to the idea of a whole program of edits, particularly one whose stated goal is to integrate content from a single third-party source instead of to improve these articles. I'm not saying these goals are mutually exclusive, but the interests of wikipedia should be primary. Merely acknowledging your potential WP:COI is not enough, I need to be convinced that this is not a veiled advertising campaign, a practice which very much ruffles my feathers here on wikipedia. Also, as has been pointed out above, I have yet to see a fair use statement and, in fact, your terms of use seem to forbid reprinting of the material licensed from the APA.
That said, I do think that citing Mindsite as a reference instead of BehaveNet or the DSM itself would benefit articles on psychopathology, because providing a link to the text in addition to the diagnostic criteria may prove useful to someone who wants to dig deeper without having to shell out $$ for the DSM. However, generally speaking, the text itself is too technical for a general audience, and I would balk at the idea of blockquoting even short bits of it. It is better for an editor to take the time to digest and restate the material for a general audience. Steve Carlson Talk 03:49, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
I've updated the DSM-IV index with a list of related Wikipedia articles here. Please check this out and edit directly. Mindsite ( talk) 07:22, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
Your site and the list of disorders seems to be about psychological disorders. So I wonder why the sleep disorders are included. They're mostly not psychological? IIRC the circadian rhythm disorders were removed from psychology sections not so long ago (except for SAD, which got left behind). -- Hordaland ( talk) 20:58, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
We've updated the page layout at Mindsite to better reflect that we are hosting the text revision. Mindsite ( talk) 15:23, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
Updated copyright discussion. Please leave any additional copyright issues on that thread. Mindsite ( talk) 23:26, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Would you consider adding any input to our proposal regarding the DSM-IV.
I'm not sure I understand what exactly your proposal is. Is it to generally prefer Mindsite as a reference for DSM? I think it might be a good idea for mental health articles to use an external link template for DSM references. This could, then, include links to different reliable sources for DSM info, such as BehaveNet and Mindsite. I see there is an attempt at this att Template:DSM-IV Codes, it is however unused. / skagedal ... 11:03, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
As far as pointing you to the main users, I've already pointed them to your thread at the Schizophrenia article. As I said, the Psych area of Wiki is very weak, but in terms of those of us who write featured articles, Eubulides ( talk · contribs) works on autism-related articles and many others, Casliber ( talk · contribs) works on schizophrenia and others (he is currently working to bring major depressive disorder up to speed, so your crosspost there wasn't needed), I work on Tourette syndrome and others, Fainites ( talk · contribs) works on reactive attachment disorder, etc. I've put out the word, but unless the Psych Project miraculously gets stronger, WP:MED will be a good, central place, and I've already posted there. [1] If that doesn't yield something, I'll point you in some other directions tomorrow. I'm not on the West Coast, so it's past my bedtime :-) SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 04:36, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
Mindsite, I have your page watchlisted, so we can communicate here. Your proposal should go in a subpage, which can be transcluded to other places. If you give me a suggested (brief) title, I'll set the page up for you. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 20:38, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Also, you may want to examine these two categories:
along with a description of the assessment ratings:
SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 20:43, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi there, and thank you for your message. There are several points I'd like to see clarified:
Best wishes, Fvasconcellos ( t· c) 22:32, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Interesting. I think the what is best for wikipedia is being able to list the criteria here (under Fair Use) on the respective wikipedia page on the article, and then referring to the reference for more information. The descriptive body of text would not be needed but can be referred to I guess. Sorry, I have been busy with other things and not read teh discussion so far. I will try to get up to speed above. Cheers, Casliber ( talk · contribs) 23:05, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Jolly useful. I think all of your suggestions for use above have their place. Fainites barley 23:35, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
I made this change to try out using citations to Mindsite from Autism (instead of to Behavenet, which has just the diagnostic criteria). Here is the sample citation. Note that it cites just the diagnostic criteria, not the whole page:
Here is what it looks like:
{{
cite book}}
: |access-date=
requires |url=
(
help); External link in |chapterurl=
(
help); Unknown parameter |chapterurl=
ignored (|chapter-url=
suggested) (
help)Does this look good? Any further suggestions for citation format?
Anyway, some comments:
Eubulides ( talk) 23:56, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Being a laissez-faire person, I added your site to the External Links list for the MDD article. It will stay there unless we hear from APA that your use of DSM-IV-TR is not legitimate. Also, as other people here noted you would want to make it explicit on your site that you are using DSM-IV-TR. (It implicitly follows from the copyright dates.) Good luck! Paul Gene ( talk) 09:57, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
My biggest concern about any edit to an article is whether the articles benefits from said change. This concern is intensified in reaction to the idea of a whole program of edits, particularly one whose stated goal is to integrate content from a single third-party source instead of to improve these articles. I'm not saying these goals are mutually exclusive, but the interests of wikipedia should be primary. Merely acknowledging your potential WP:COI is not enough, I need to be convinced that this is not a veiled advertising campaign, a practice which very much ruffles my feathers here on wikipedia. Also, as has been pointed out above, I have yet to see a fair use statement and, in fact, your terms of use seem to forbid reprinting of the material licensed from the APA.
That said, I do think that citing Mindsite as a reference instead of BehaveNet or the DSM itself would benefit articles on psychopathology, because providing a link to the text in addition to the diagnostic criteria may prove useful to someone who wants to dig deeper without having to shell out $$ for the DSM. However, generally speaking, the text itself is too technical for a general audience, and I would balk at the idea of blockquoting even short bits of it. It is better for an editor to take the time to digest and restate the material for a general audience. Steve Carlson Talk 03:49, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
I've updated the DSM-IV index with a list of related Wikipedia articles here. Please check this out and edit directly. Mindsite ( talk) 07:22, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
Your site and the list of disorders seems to be about psychological disorders. So I wonder why the sleep disorders are included. They're mostly not psychological? IIRC the circadian rhythm disorders were removed from psychology sections not so long ago (except for SAD, which got left behind). -- Hordaland ( talk) 20:58, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
We've updated the page layout at Mindsite to better reflect that we are hosting the text revision. Mindsite ( talk) 15:23, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
Updated copyright discussion. Please leave any additional copyright issues on that thread. Mindsite ( talk) 23:26, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Would you consider adding any input to our proposal regarding the DSM-IV.
I'm not sure I understand what exactly your proposal is. Is it to generally prefer Mindsite as a reference for DSM? I think it might be a good idea for mental health articles to use an external link template for DSM references. This could, then, include links to different reliable sources for DSM info, such as BehaveNet and Mindsite. I see there is an attempt at this att Template:DSM-IV Codes, it is however unused. / skagedal ... 11:03, 29 October 2008 (UTC)