User talk:Lova Falk

Please don't be shy, write a message. Also, I might have asked you a question and missed your answer... Please remind me!

My box is just for me. /Archive 1 /Archive 2

Perennial philosophy

Hello. In response to your edits, it is an academic convention (in both Chicago and Harvard manuals of style) to put foreign language translations into italics. I am a scholar of Indian religions and my work has been translated into three asian languages. Regards. 81.106.127.14 (talk) 15:38, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Neither is it usual to put these foreign language translations into boldface as you have done. If you read the passage you referred me to you will find this stated. 81.106.127.14 (talk) 15:57, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Ignore all credentials Greetings, Joshua Jonathan (talk) 19:58, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

(Copied to Talk:Perennial philosophy#Bold and/or italic)

Developmental Psychology Course

Hi Lova

Thanks for the note. I understand you concerns; I have heard that Wikipedia prefers to rely on secondary sources. Please understand that we are participating as part of the Association for Psychological Science (APS) Wikipedia Initiative. APS has argued that Wikipedia's focus on secondary sources is sub-optimal, and has been advocating for the increased presence of primary sources on Wikipedia, and has asked instructors such as myself to push for inclusion of more primary scientific material. The nature of the student's present assignment is in this spirit. Unfortunately, not every student is as skilled as we would like in adding this material; variance in success is to be expected in every student endeavor. I apologize for frustration regarding the need to edit material that is presented in a less than ideal fashion from Wikipedia's perspective. Yet, on behalf of APS and the scientific community, I urge you to consider leaving in more primary material than instinct might otherwise recommend, in order to slowly chip away at Wikipedia's preference for secondary sources in order to improve the quality of the primary information that is available to a wide audience, as recommended by APS. PauljosephconwayTest (talk) 04:06, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Copied to User talk:Pauljosephconway/Psychology 2410A at King's to continue the discussion there. Joshua Jonathan (talk) 09:26, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you!

Hey Lova - thanks so much for your encouraging comment about my work on the 'Creativity In Diverse Cultures' section of the 'Creativity' page. I only just saw it now; it helps me feel a little more confident in this strange and exciting new world of Wikipedia! Hope your work becomes less strenuous soon. Take care, Doctor Girl (talk) 15:30, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

I remember feeling a bit nervous when I started editing Wikipedia, doing one tiny edit and checking each day if it still was there (after more than five years, it is still there!) When it comes to work, I now hope that February will be a bit more relaxed... Lova Falk talk 19:14, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Virginia Satir

Thank you for catching the error in the edit of the Virginia Satir article. Much appreciated!MerlinsMagic (talk) 19:05, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for thanking me! Lova Falk talk 19:08, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for the answer on forgetfullness. Pass a Method talk 16:23, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome! Lova Falk talk 16:35, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

12000 edits

Get a life... - but you got one! Cheers, Joshua Jonathan (talk) 19:39, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

		The Barnstar of Integrity
		You receive a lot of appreciation, many "Thank you!"s I admire your diligence in responding to other Wikipedians. Joshua Jonathan (talk) 19:45, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! Very much appreciated! Lova Falk talk 19:49, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Adolescence article again

Hey, Lova Falk. I know that you've stayed out of these matters: [1][2][3]. But can you at least let me know your thoughts on them, here on your talk page or at mine? Flyer22 (talk) 23:24, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi Flyer22! Thank you for asking. I will look into it, but not tonight (it's friday night in Sweden). I have had a long day at work and I'll just do some easy watchlist checks before I'll log off... Lova Falk talk 19:33, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Okay, Lova Falk. Thank you for considering to give me your thoughts on this. Flyer22 (talk) 21:00, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Affectional bond

Hello Lova Falk - thanks for policing Affectional Bond. My history of psych class is doing the APS wikipedia initiative. Not all of them have the editing thing down. I'm encouraging them to talk to you. Best, James Council, NDSU prof of psych — Preceding unsigned comment added by James Council (talk • contribs) 21:26, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! I'd be happy talking with them. Lova Falk talk 10:28, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Evolutionary Medicine

Subj: Infusing Evolutionary Thinking into Medical Education

Body: Dear Wikipedia,

The NSF-funded National Evolutionary Synthesis Center (NESCent) has formed a working group of physicians and scientists to infuse curricula at medical schools with evolutionary principles. We are creating resources for medical students. We had considered creating online modules with the hope that students would find them and use them. Since many medical students first consult “Dr. Wiki,” we believe contributing to this open-access resource would best leverage our efforts. We have several group members who will be working directly on this project- Stephen C Stearns, C Athena Aktipis, and myself. We are contacting you to inform you of our plans and receive any feedback:

1) Adding an “evolutionary considerations” subsection to medical entries, like “fever” and “risk factors for breast cancers” with… a) citations to open-access articles b) links to evo-med entries in Wikipedia c) links at the bottom of articles to “Understanding Evolution,” a highly reputable online resource visited 1.2 million times per month. UC Berkley maintains it. A representative is working closely with our group. 2) Editing extant evo-med related articles to be more complete. We plan to begin with the “evolutionary medicine” article and fan-out from there. 3) Adding articles for key concepts or areas of research in evolutionary medicine that do not yet exist on Wikipedia. 4) Amplifying our efforts with a training for enthusiastic pre-medical and medical students- the Evolutionary Medicine Wikipedia Network. We will host a workshop at NESCent in 2013. I have found the helpful guides to editing. If it would be helpful for a Wikipedia representative to attend and assist, we are open to the idea.

Thank you, Brandon Hidaka BrandonHidaka (talk) 19:59, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you Brandon for informing me and aksing for feedback. Here it comes! Wikipedia is an encyclopedia "that anyone can edit" and also most of the readers should be able to read. When adding content to articles in Wikipedia, you cannot only have your students in mind as your potential readers but also an interested "general public" who might not always have had an advanced education. It is quite an art to express difficult concepts in an easy way! For instance, the section that you wrote on The evolution of aging, you need to start with explaining what you even mean with "the evolution of ageing". With friendly regards, Lova Falk talk 20:12, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for the helpful feedback. I will be much more keen to explain complex topics (there is a reason why evolutionary theory was "happened upon" in the not-too-distant 19th century!) more thoroughly for the general public. Besides, most medical students do not have a good understanding of evolution. Looking over the "ageing" article, it appears that much is geared toward the promise of life extension, a business that can be quite lucrative... Also, I hope that it is permissible to continue to use pithy, powerful words that may be beyond the scope of most vocabularies in hopes of expanding them. Cheers! BrandonHidaka (talk) 22:30, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

December 2012

Hello Lova Falk, I'm Andrewaskew. I'm responding to the linked comment on my talk page.

I'm sorry, I have read and re-read my edit (I had to remind myself) and I cannot see what POV you are saying that I am trying to push.

This was just a quick little edit I performed because I was going through the pages that link to Media manipulation and correcting the redirects. When I came upon Distraction the By media section just consisted of two links (and with your revert, now does again). I feel that sections consisting of just links are extremely ugly, and have no place in Wikipedia (not an offical policy, just an opinion). So I took it upon myself to introduce some content into the section. This I did by pulling material from the two linked pages (Media manipulation & Media multitasking), then rewriting it to make a short and coherent section.

I have no particular attachment to the above edit, but feel that this section needs some text. So, if you can advise in what way you feel the section violated WP:NPOV and what, in your opinion, could be done to improve it, I am happy to write a compromise.

Thank you.

--Andrewaskew (talk) 22:49, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
(Reply) Lova Falk talk 08:14, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

No problem at all; I prefer editors to be overvigilant than to leave low-traffic pages like this neglected. I'm glad we could sort it out. Also, you're right, the first paragraph does need a citation (I'll see what I can do to properly source this paragraph myself).

Secondly, my apologies for the late answer to your late answer. I too have been busy over the holidays and have taken a short wikibreak.

Best wishes to you. --Andrewaskew (talk) 23:27, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Anxiety

Hi Lova Falk - my idea was to move the prevention-related sections on caffeine into the prevention section - you have now deleted them altogether? Best wishes (JCJC777 (talk) 23:51, 24 December 2012 (UTC))

Hi JCJC777, no, in your last version: http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Anxiety&oldid=529595760 there was this line in the section prevention:

"For some people, anxiety can be very much reduced by coming off caffeine.[40] Anxiety can temporarily increase during caffeine withdrawal.[41][42][43]"

and this line in the section treatment:

"For some people, anxiety can be very much reduced by coming off caffeine.[40] Anxiety can temporarily increase during caffeine withdrawal.[41][42][43]"

So I removed it from prevention, and it is still in treatment. I thought it was better in treatment than in prevention, first because the line says anxiety can be reduced by coming off caffeine - which is treatment, not prevention, but also, I have never heard of people not starting to drink coffee because they want to prevent anxiety, however, I have heard of people stopping drinking coffee. Now, I have no sources for this, but actually I doubt if you can find a source that describes not starting to drink coffee in order to prevent anxiety... Best wishes! Lova Falk talk 07:09, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Christmas diner

Don't you have a Christmas diner to enjoy? Best wishes, Joshua Jonathan (talk) 20:46, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

I ate a lovely Christmas diner yesterday! In Sweden the big day is Christmas eve, whereas on Christmas day we're all tired and listless after having eaten and drunk too much the day before. Best wishes to you too! Lova Falk talk 20:52, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

You have mail!

Hello, Lova Falk. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Regarding a t-shirt nomination :) Jalexander--WMF 23:20, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for supporting User:Jacobisq. Nice that a T shirt may be, it would be nicer if Wiki could award grants to a few select editors for a specific contract of work. I personally would give User:Jacobisq such a grant. BTW he tends to take winter Wiki breaks i think motivated by Seasonal_affective_disorder. He is likely to be back in a few months.--Penbat (talk) 09:27, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that would be great! Would be really nice to take a few months leave from work and edit edit edit away! Lova Falk talk 09:54, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Wauw

Wauw.Great! Thanks for this nomination Joshua Jonathan (talk) 20:13, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

You deserve it. Lova Falk talk 20:16, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Individualism

there's a bit of silly stuff going on here if you have the time Talk:Individualism --Penbat (talk) 11:34, 29 December 2012 (UTC) Have u seen [4]. anyway i have now put an alert on the admin message board about this --Penbat (talk) 12:19, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

No I hadn't seen it! I was a bit surprised to find a remark dated september. How silly of me not to check the history. Lova Falk talk 12:21, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

thx for your help, see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Talk:Individualism--Penbat (talk) 13:49, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

This is a first for me. Difficult but interesting. Lova Falk talk 14:02, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Happy New Year

I hope that you have a Happy New Year Lova! All the best in 2013.--MrADHD | T@1k? 02:29, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! Lova Falk talk 03:21, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Sorry!

Hello. My name is Miquaz (My wikipedia name is Miquaz 1.) I'm sorry about messing up your fonts, but I never knew that you could change Wikipedia fonts and when I saw your talk page, I was amazed! I went to edit it, and saw the name of the font section, and wondered if I could change it to another font name. I forgot to change it back to what it was. I'm really sorry! --Miquaz1 (talk) 17:32, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

P.S Happy New Year!!

Hi Miquaz, and thank you for explaining. You know, you should be a bit careful with other people's talk pages and also their user pages. It was real nice of you to welcome Beatrix Altava - and fully appropriate - but it is fully up to Beatrix Altava to decide if the user page should be empty or not. The only times we are supposed to edit the user page is when it obviously has been vandalized, or when the user has told you to do so. Happy new year to you too! Lova Falk talk 19:56, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Beatrix Altava is my sister. She told me to do that. But you're right. I did that to other people too. Thanks for letting me know that. Is it okay for me to edit new user's talk pages?

Thanks!

--Miquaz1 (talk) 21:47, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi Miquaz! How nice to have your sister on Wikipedia. Of course, if she asks you to write something, it's fine. With other (new) user's talk pages, you can leave messages, for instance you can welcome them, help them or ask them a question, so in that way you can edit the page. But we don't usually edit for instance spelling mistakes on user's talk page, and it is not okay to change anything they have said. Lova Falk talk 08:01, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Great Job!

Thanks for re-organizing the empathy article in a structured way that could be much easier to understand for a person confused about the cognitive and emotional components of empathy. Particularly for some of those on the Autism Spectrum with the condition of Alexithymia, where trying to find a construct of words to describe their experience of their emotional world can be very difficult without someone to guide them there in words in a structured way that makes sense. Or for those that have recently acquired or are in the process of acquiring the described conditions of Alexithymia and/or compassion fatigue as a result of other factors in life, with the vague sense that something is missing that they had before.

There have many people that have expressed concern that when the phrase "a lack of empathy" is tossed around associated with different DSM-IV-TR labels for disorders that it means that a person with those disorders are essentially not human.

In part, as a result of your recent efforts, the whole of the empathy issue is better structured and easier to understand for those that turn to Google and Wiki for the answers that dictionaries don't provide, to understand more fully what it means to be human. I can't think of many other words more important to gain an accurate and fuller understanding of than empathy, per the new demands of culture and the impact it has on most everyone's connection to others. For the first time in five decades, I feel comfortable that I understand what empathy is. I wish I had access to information like this decades before, but it's good that it is only finger tips away for most, now:).Yellowboy70 (talk) 23:26, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Yellowboy70 and thank you so much! I have been confused about the empathy issue myself and I was happy when I finally found the time to immerse myself into it a couple of days ago. For me, many pieces of the puzzle have fallen into place. Once more, thank you for your comment! Lova Falk talk 07:37, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Edinburgh

I found this presentation in Edinburgh fascinating – I have always been interested in the subject. Amy Cuddy is a remarkable young woman whose own story is inspirational.
Thank you for adding it to the article.
Happy New Year! –
 – Gareth Griffith-Jones |The Welsh Buzzard| 09:49, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! I usually delete lots of external links so it felt almost like a transgression when I put in one myself, but this one was so good I couldn't resist it. Happy new year to you too! Lova Falk talk 10:20, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Ha, ha! I know – most often they are SPAM –
 – Gareth Griffith-Jones |The Welsh Buzzard| 10:25, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

RE:Your edits to ACT and DBT

Sorry I forgot the source. See here: [5]. Accordingly, it lists DBT and ACT ARE as forms of CBT. Also see here: [6]. It says: "Modern clinical behavior analysis in the form of acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT), however, succeeds in providing a functional definition of human values that meets this latter criterion. ACT is rooted in behavior analysis and relational frame theory (RFT) and defines values in terms of verbally established motivation." And here: [7], which says: "Clinical behavior analysis (CBA) involves the application of behavior analytic principles to the full range of human problems, many of which have traditionally been considered "mental health" issues. CBA clinicians work with the relationship between thoughts, feelings, and other behavior to help people move beyond their problems and toward living more fulfilling lives." Can you revert my edits as they ARE correct? Thank you. ATC ^{. Talk} 18:03, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi ATC! Your first source is incomplete. Maybe it looks different on your computer due to cache, but on my computer, I just get a document of two pages, saying "Welcome to clinical behavior analysis" - no name of author, no name of book (if it is a part of a book???), no year - not a reliable source. However, the second source your provided is better, so I have removed the first source and put the second source in. Your third source doesn't mention either ACT or DBT.

However, the second part of your statement, that ACT is a combination of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and applied behavior analysis (ABA) is not in your source, so the citation needed statement stays. I must say, I doubt if that is really true, as far as I know, I would rather describe ACT as a combination of CBT and mindfulness.

When it comes to DBT, there is only this incomplete source to state that it is a form of clinical behavior analysis and no source at all for the combination statement, so I tagged this. Lova Falk talk 19:41, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

1) The scientific journal stated that ACT is a form of clinical behavior analysis in the lead. According to Wiki polices, for these purposes, scientific journals are the most valid resources. 2) Also, I was able to find a journal for DBT. It states: "With its clear hierarchy of treatment targets and behavior modification (through functional analysis), DBT is well suited for treatment of many problems characterized by behavior dyscontrol." See here: [8]. And according to this journal: [9], it states the following: "Perhaps there is a tendency to draw pejorative contrasts between PBS and ABA in order to bolster claims about the status of PBS as a new and distinct science or discipline (e.g., Bambara et al., 1994; E. Carr, 1997; E. Carr et al., 2002; Knoster et al., 2003; Sisson, 1992). There may be disagreement among PBS leaders on this point. On the one hand, for example, Horner (2000) stated that “Positive behavior support is not a new approach. … [It is] the application of behavior analysis to the social problems created by such behaviors as self-injury” (p. 97). He further stated, “There is no difference in theory or science between positive behavior support and behavior modification. These are the same approach with different names. If any difference exists, it is in the acceptance [by PBS] of much larger outcomes and the need to deliver the global technology that will deliver these outcomes” (p. 99). Other writers have referred to PBS as an “extension” of applied behavior analysis (e.g., Turnbull et al., 2002, p. 377)." ATC ^{. Talk} 21:34, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

3) According to the research, CBA is a form of ABA. See here: [10]. It states: "Clinical behavior analysis (CBA) is defined as the application of radical behaviorism to answer the most basic question about outpatient adult behavior therapy (or any other type of behavior therapy) (Kohlenberg, Tsai and Dougher, 1993)." Plus, Radical behaviorism was developed by B.F. Skinner who later changed the name to Behavior Analysis. The application of behavior analysis, formerly called behavior modification, is now called applied behavior analysis (ABA). ATC ^{. Talk} 21:34, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

4) Resolved the issue. Are universities accepted as a reliable source? 5) The psychology department at the University of Waikato, stated the following: "Clinical Behaviour Analysis (CBA) is an approach, based in behaviour analysis and classed as one of the cognitive behaviour therapies (CBT), that involves the application of behaviour-analytic principles through verbal strategies to help people with problems. These therapies, often termed third generation behaviour therapies, include Dialectical Behaviour Therapy (DBT), Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT), Behavioural Activation (BA), Functional Analytic Psychotherapy (FAP) and Integrative Behavioural Couples Therapy (IBCT)." See here: [11]. Why would a university state this meanwhile it is almost impossible to find all of the subtypes of clinical behavior analysis in a scientific journal? ATC ^{. Talk} 23:45, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

I hope you don't mind that I numbered you comments so you can see what I answered.

1) Yes, we agree on this one and as you can see in the article, yesterday (before you wrote to me) I put in this article as a source.
2) Neither of your two sources say that DBT is a form of clinical behavior analysis. The first source says it uses functional analysis - which is not the same as saying that it is a form of clinical behavior analysis. In the second source, it starts talking about PBS. The article is about DBT not PBS.
3) Yes, your source says that CBA is a form of ABA but not that it is a combination of CBT and ABA, as you said.
5) I used this ref for the statement that DBT is a form of clinical behavior analysis.
4) No, the issue is not resolved. There is no source for the statement that CBA is a combination of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and applied behavior analysis (ABA). Nor does the CBA article say so. As you can see, I removed this statement out of the definition, also because it made the definition unnecessarily wordy. Lova Falk talk 08:03, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Yay!

I got my t-shirt. Thanks a million. Have you got yours yet? Mine's a little smaller than I expected, but it accentuates my rippling six-pack so I don't mind. :) --Anthonyhcole (talk) 10:17, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

You're very welcome! And no, not yet. If it's too small, I'll just hang it on the wall. Lova Falk talk 19:35, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi

I loved this. Do you know if the DSM-V will be including SLI as a symptom of the autism spectrum? It and IQ were the defining symptoms that distinguished Kanner's syndrome from high functioning autism and Asperger's. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 13:04, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! And I don't know. This section says nothing about a language delay. But I'm sure my employer will send me to lectures about DSM-5 some time in the near future and then I'll find out. Cheers! Lova Falk talk 16:33, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Cheers. If you hear something, and remember, can you please let me know? I'm having a little break. Catch you later. Soldier on. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 16:39, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

I will. Enjoy your break! Lova Falk talk 18:27, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you

Hey,

Just wanted to say thank you for both supporting me and questioning my ideas and reasons. And I don't mean either in the bad way. Studying it's easy for my egotism to kick in and to be stuck in that mindset.

So thank you. It's easy to get caught up in your own head and people to question that which is good to open up your own headspace. 10:37, 11 January 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Legios (talk • contribs)

You're welcome Legios! Lova Falk talk 07:48, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	For your great kindness and encouragements. Thanks a lot. ···Vanischenu「m/Talk」 10:04, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you so much! You made my day. ♥ Lova Falk talk 10:52, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Grants

Looks like the grants idea is taking off. http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Start --Penbat (talk) 09:36, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for telling me! Lova Falk talk 15:56, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

BTW, although User:Jacobisq has done a lot of seriously awesome stuff, his earlier work was done in an unconventional style where he simply quoted text fragments from the source instead of summarising the cited source. Apart from possible copywrite issues, it also makes the text difficult to read. He is now no longer doing this (see User_talk:Jacobisq#CCI_Notice) and is gradually converting his old material listed at User:Jacobisq/Article list but it is a slow process. If you can help with the conversion please do. I would help myself but quite a lot of it is out of my depth.--Penbat (talk) 16:34, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Good to know in case I don't know what to do. The thing is, however, that my job is pretty intensive and I'm not always up to highly demanding editing. But sometimes I am... Lova Falk talk 17:10, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

It makes it a bit easier that there is no question of the accuracy or veracity of User:Jacobisq's cites, it is more a matter of just re-expressing his quoted text fragments in a more conventional style. It may not necessarily be required to consult the original sources to do this but an understanding of the subject matter is a prerequisite.--Penbat (talk) 08:54, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

His site is on my to-do list! Lova Falk talk 09:09, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

I had noticed that flaw in Jacobisq's work, such as at the Preadolescence article. Glad to know that he's no longer editing that way, though some quoting is fine. Flyer22 (talk) 04:01, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Feel free to help improve his old material.--Penbat (talk) 09:49, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

It could theoretically be viable to get a grant for Jacobisq to clean up his earlier work but he probably wouldn't be back from his wikibreak before the 1st deadline of Feb 15th. It would be a well defined task. --Penbat (talk) 17:56, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Secondary sex characteristic article

I wonder if the comment an IP made there on the talk was really made by that registered editor (the registered name the IP used). Why wouldn't the editor make that comment while signed in? And why sign with the user name instead of the IP name? If he simply wanted us to know that it's him and not a random IP, that goes back to my first question. And how did he calculate what the time would state without signing under that IP name?

As for the new images added to the article,[12] [13] I suppose they are okay for inclusion. Flyer22 (talk) 03:54, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

My guess is that it is written by Floating boat, but s/he is simply away from his/her own computer. But why not just ask Floating boat? And yes, I think the pictures are fine. Lova Falk talk 08:03, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

I don't see how being away from his computer could affect him signing in, unless you mean that he didn't want his log information left behind. But we don't have to save our password and we can clear the browser history. Flyer22 (talk) 18:04, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Actually I thought of forgetting passwords... Happens to me every now and then. Lova Falk talk 18:58, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

I did think to ask him, and will do so now. Flyer22 (talk) 18:04, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Good! I'll be watching. Lova Falk talk 18:58, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

You may have seen by now, but I asked him to weigh in here on your talk page. Do you mind? Flyer22 (talk) 19:06, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

No of course not, it's fine! Lova Falk talk 19:07, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

No, this is not me. It seems I have an impersonator. - a boat that can float! (watch me float) 13:05, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Oops! Must be someone who admires you. But I'll help checking his/her contributions. Lova Falk talk 20:12, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply, Floating Boat. Whether the IP admires you or not, the IP doing that is horrible. I took your user name off the comment and put the IP's user name against it. The IP has also been warned about this by an administrator on his or her talk page. Glad that I checked into this. I think I've seen something like that before, which made me more suspicious of an IP signing a comment with a user name. Turns out that he or she had gotten the Wikipedia UTC date wrong anyway. Flyer22 (talk) 01:00, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

I see that you were the one who sought action against this, however. I hope that it doesn't happen to you again, or any of us (if it hasn't already). It's awful that we can't do anything to stop this type of thing from happening. One of the many downsides of allowing non-registered editing on Wikipedia. Flyer22 (talk) 01:15, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

You are quite right Flyer22. I joked but it is serious. Lova Falk talk 07:36, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you!

Dear Lova, Thank you for the welcome to wiki! The info you provided was very helpful, and I look forward to putting it to good use!

Firecatalta (talk) 12:17, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Nice to hear this! Lova Falk talk 12:22, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Links

Hello, I'm leaving you a message here; I'm Factmaven and you messaged me about removing links I took the time to add to a number of pages. I would like to discuss this. The audio programs I am offering as External Links are with reputable sources and recognized experts. Perhaps you would prefer a different sort of citation, perhaps with the Radio Station call letters, such as shown in the external links of this author. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Merkel

Please let me know a better way to have this conversation. I did not see a message box, for instance and I'm not sure how to actually converse about this unless we have a phone conversation or at least have a more direct form of messaging. Kindly advise me about the potential of gaining a better understanding of the way to share the interviews and documentary programs as references/links for interested people to access via Wikipedia searches.

Thank you, Factmaven — Preceding unsigned comment added by Factmaven (talk • contribs) 17:08, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Factmaven, thank you for your message. I will answer you but not now, because it's been a tough day at work and I am tired. I'll get back to you during the weekend! Lova Falk talk 20:34, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Once more hi to you Factmaven, in case you wonder when you will get your answer, I have asked here if I was wrong removing your links. I hope I'll soon answer you! Lova Falk talk 09:47, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Finally, my final answer. I have asked in several places, but I haven't been able to get a clear answer about your links. So this is what I'll do: I won't remove them if you put them back in. Thank you for your patience! Lova Falk talk 18:10, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

This message to me was misplaced and I didn't see it before I wrote my final answer: Hi again, Lova Falk. I do not see a message "box" on your talk page and so I don't know how best to message you. You received my last, so I'm just writing here and hope you'll receive this message promptly. I would like you to reinstate the links I had taken quite a bit of time to add as sources in Addiction, Entheogens, Psychedelics, Hallucinogens, Opiod dependency and Drug Rehabilitation as well as the parenting ones for my other recent production. If PhDs and internationally recognized people in these fields are re-posting the program link on their sites, why shouldn't the link be available to the world of people searching for information and in need of help and treatment? What evidence do you wish for in the way of credentials? Let me please provide what you need, but I am asking that you do not censor my work from the public eye; this is unfair and discriminatory. I produce programs as a public service and they are meant to be available to the public. Wikipedia is a trusted source, but so are the programs I am producing. We are partners in bringing valuable information to the public free of charge. Some people, auditory learners, gain more from audio than from text. Please let me know what you need from me to reinstate my links. Thank you very much, Lova Falk, for the service you provide to Wikipedia. Respectfully, Jari Chevalier, Host/Producer

Hi Lova Falk,

I received your "final" message earlier today and went back in and added the external links in the appropriate Wikipedia articles.

Thank you and best wishes, Factmaven — Preceding unsigned comment added by Factmaven (talk • contribs) 01:32, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the encouragement!

Hi Lova Falk! I wanted to thank you for your encouragement, both when I first joined the community, and yesterday, for encouraging 173.81.148.252 – also me! I had forgotten both to log in and to source the info, and if I had been a new-new user, I might have felt very discouraged that my first edit had been undone. Your efforts to encourage new users helped me feel comfortable and welcome in the community from the very beginning, and I was touched that you took the time to reach out even when all you had to go on was an IP address. So, without further ado:

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		For going above and beyond the call of duty to encourage new Wikipedians. Thank you! Firecatalta (talk) 01:08, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Firecatalta (talk) 01:08, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you Firecatalta, you made the sun shine this morning! (And I'm also happy we didn't lose 173.81.148.252 who seemed to be such a good editor.) Lova Falk talk 09:08, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Discussion on the AFT5 Request for Comment

Hey Lova Falk - this is to notify you that there is a discussion starting on the Article Feedback RfC talkpage that has ramifications for the RfC itself. Your input is much appreciated :). Thanks! and apologies if I've missed anyone Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 16:44, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Requesting third opinion on Spirituality

Hi Lova. Could you give a third opinion on Spirituality? See Talk:Spirituality#Lead, Talk:Spirituality#Conceptual background, Talk:Spirituality#Recent edits and Talk:Spirituality#Requesting third opinions on lead and definition. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 04:48, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

I will, but I will take some time to think first. Lova Falk talk 08:54, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Okay. Thanks Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 09:30, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi Lova. Thanks for responding, and sorry for bothering you with this. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 14:18, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

No need at all to apologize! I just wish I could be of more help. Lova Falk talk 14:54, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the invitation to 81. "Show a little tenderness... To soften our hearts" Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 08:52, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Motivation

I've just seen what happened on Motivation. I had no idea I'd undone some of your work - I thought I was just making a minor change! I think there must have been an edit conflict between us that I didn't merge properly, since we were editing about the same time. Not sure how this happened, but I'll take more care with edit conflicts in future. Apologies! MartinPoulter (talk) 17:33, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

No problem! When you didn't answer me, I figured out this much - including the part in which you were not aware of it. It has also happened to me, a minor edit resulting in a revert to a previous version. Lova Falk talk 17:47, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Chart issues figured out!

Hi Lova, thank you for your recent work on the BPD article! I figured out the differences in our values: I had forgotten to add a row specifically for drug abuse/dependence, and then I mistakenly put those values into the "overall substance abuse/dependence" row. So, there's that mystery solved, and I’ll add a row for drug abuse in a moment. Also, thank you for checking and fixing the chart values for Axis II! I do most of my editing late at night, and the later it is, the more likely small details are to get lost. Thanks for catching them! Firecatalta (talk) 00:06, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

P.S. Just updated the chart with 2008 values; still need to find some more recent values for eating and somatoform disorders. Firecatalta (talk) 06:10, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Firecatalta, you do such a great job! Mixing up a figure can happen to anyone, that's why it's so good we make Wikipedia together. Lova Falk talk 07:45, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

You also do an amazing job, especially given how many articles you're working on! It's been a privilege getting to work with you. Can't remember what the time difference is, so either have a wonderful day or a great night! Firecatalta (talk) 07:49, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! Is it night at your place? It's morning here. Lova Falk talk 07:52, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Oh no, I just saw this! Yes, it was night here (I'm over in the US), though now it's a beautiful saturday afternoon. Have a wonderful evening! Firecatalta (talk) 19:28, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Ah! Lifting a tiny tip of your veil. I actually thought you were in Australia. Lova Falk talk 19:36, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Haha I'll try to keep the mystery going in other areas! I would love to live in Australia, though. Firecatalta (talk) 00:28, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

User 81.106.127.14

Hello! I see that you reported this user. I don't know where, and I'd rather not lose much time on this, but user made rude comments on my talk page. Maybe could be added as evidence for possible block or ban? Thanks for helping.Tao2911 (talk) 21:53, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

No, it's all over. I see now that I might have reported user to the wrong place. I reported to Wikipedia:Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism and the admin did not block or ban user, just left a warning on his Talk page. But I guess now that I should have reported to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Hmm. Lova Falk talk 07:42, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

He's blocked. And he's attracted a lot of attention. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 08:10, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Good to know! Lova Falk talk 08:15, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks to both of you. Sometimes a problem is too big to handle on your own. Thanks. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 08:08, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

You're very welcome! Lova Falk talk 08:10, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

There's more: User talk:De728631#Brahman. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 09:55, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Very tiresome indeed! Lova Falk talk 14:40, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Edit

Explain yourself. Homosexual as a noun is offensive. CTF83! 00:47, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

I won't fight over this but there is nothing offensive about being homosexual. Lova Falk talk 07:28, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

_{(Talk page stalker)} You don't need to explain yourself. What was that about? Is the use of heterosexual as a noun also problematic? While gay is now more commonly used, there's no problem with either term. Cheers, 99.12.243.171 (talk) 14:32, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! Lova Falk talk 14:34, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Okay. I just found this thread [14], which suggests that the term is associated with a pejorative and judgmental clinical use in the past, especially in the US. If the use of homosexual as a noun is indeed broadly viewed as unacceptable, I plead guilty of ignorance, not for the first time. 99.12.243.171 (talk) 15:31, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Here is a link to a broader and more varied discussion [15]. 99.12.243.171 (talk) 15:42, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Same ignorance from my part. Quite shocking though that this neutral term has become a pejorative. It reveals the prejudices of a narrow-minded society. Thank you for telling me. (I really like your talk page stalking) Lova Falk talk 17:59, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Not that I'm determined to keep pace with what constitutes a slur in slang usage; it seemed to me that gay, while a widely accepted term, is also used pejoratively by those who are homophobic. But then, many years ago while visiting Maine I encountered local use of the term squid, which I took to be a withering reference to summer visitors. Cheers, 99.12.243.171 (talk) 18:39, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

As long as homophobia exists, any neutral term will get infected. As far as I know (and we know a degree of ignorance is not beyond us ), words like idiot and imbecile once started as perfectly neutral descriptions. Lova Falk talk 18:45, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

So....I guess this was completely resolved? CTF83! 01:09, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Oh, to clarify, I never said there was anything offensive about being homosexual, just being called a homosexual, which is a 1970s clinical word and currently used by anti-gay extremists. CTF83! 01:12, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Oh my, the doctors again... I'm Dutch too; in Holland "homo-sexueel" is a rather normal word. "Homofiel" is more offensive, as if homo-sexuality is some kind of illness (or sickness, to stick to the negative idiom). Talking about doctors, there is a Dutch scientist, Freek Vonk, who's got ADHD, and doesn't use medication. He says, 'this is how I am, and I'm happy with it'. And he's "vet cool"! Check him out on Uitzending gemist (in Dutch). Ehm... what's it got to do with homo-sexuality? Nothing, except that he screws all the clinicians. And he's definitely "gay", in the sense of "having or showing a merry, lively mood: gay spirits; gay music. Synonyms: cheerful, gleeful, happy, glad, cheery, lighthearted, joyous, joyful, jovial; sunny, lively, vivacious, sparkling; chipper, playful, jaunty, sprightly, blithe." [16]. Greetings to all of you, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 05:44, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Yes CTF83!, we are completely resolved, and I understood from the start that you were discussing the expression. Is the word homosexuality still fine, or do gay people try to avoid using it? Lova Falk talk 07:17, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

And I'm a bit shocked by your example Joshua Jonathan, because here in Sweden, as far as I know, lots of adults with ADHD don't use meds and it is not a big deal in any way. We would not make a television show about it. (I see now it is not a show about not taking meds) (And, now that I think of it, ADHD diagnosis criterium D states: "There must be clear evidence of clinically significant impairment in social, academic, or occupational functioning." - one could wonder if this is the case for Freek...) Lova Falk talk 07:18, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

In that same discussion, which I took part in, it was made clear that there are some cases where the existence and/or use of the term "homosexual" is completely fine; also, no one objected (at least there in that discussion) to use of the word "homosexuality." There was agreement all around that there isn't much of an issue, or any issue, with using "homosexuality." Flyer22 (talk) 23:10, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Also made clear in that discussion, and like CTF83! touched on a bit above, the term "homosexual" was never originally neutral and it has always been pejorative in a way (or ways, rather). Flyer22 (talk) 23:21, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

And IP, yes, the term gay is of course used as a pejorative at times; the Gay article addresses that. Flyer22 (talk) 23:28, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you Flyer22! Lova Falk talk 07:34, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome. Flyer22 (talk) 00:08, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay, no home internet. Flyer22 took care of my answer. Thanks for your understanding, Lova! CTF83! 05:09, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

re: Unreadable nonsense

I agree that I could have used a nicer tone, but the fact is that the article had become un-understandable. Whether one agrees or disagrees with a practice or field, an article cannot start with an unexplained list of assumptions or hypotheses, with unexplained and unlinked technical terms that are claimed to be self-contradictory. I think that rather than merely reverting my rollback, you should have worked to make the article more intelligible. I see now it's (Vegetotherapy) a little better than it was. Finally, as you realized later, there appeared to be some sock puppets working on this obscure article.--I am One of Many (talk) 18:03, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Some sock puppets yes. Last time I counted they were twelve. However, about new editors. Even if they are hard too understand, I assume good faith and try not to chase a new editor away immediately. As for working more on the article to make it more intelligible, I usually start with putting a cn-tag and won't do any work unless a source is provided. The risk is too high that everything gets reverted... And I wasn't very friendly to you, I'm sorry for that. Lova Falk talk 18:17, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

If I was reviewing the same article this morning, I probably would not have been so harsh, but it was past my bedtime, I saw all these new editors and IPs working on this obscure article and thought it was time for a restart from a littler earlier. In this particular case, if we had sock puppets working here, I don't think we want to welcome them. In general, I do like to welcome and help out new editors. And I certainly did not mean to offend you in anyway!--I am One of Many (talk) 18:51, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

You did not offend me at all! And for my part, I was a bit morning-grumpy (your night is my morning) Lova Falk talk 18:55, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I have said things late at night that I wish I would have phrased differently the next morning!--I am One of Many (talk) 19:08, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Ahh... could it be a good idea to engage in other activities in the middle of the night? Lova Falk talk 19:52, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Blacky pictures

Yes, I know. But I think the title may be wrong, i.e. if a material or an author produces a test, the name of that test becomes, in its entirety a proper noun, thus with upper-case letters. Just for the record, I think that Thematic Apperception Test and Holtzman Inkblot Test are correct, but Rorschach test is currently incorrect. e.g. [17] Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:25, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Good argument! Please feel free to move the article. Lova Falk talk 06:47, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. I have suggested a move at the article Talk Page. Do you know if Blum was a psychologist, psychoanalyst and/or artist? Or where he worked? Martinevans123 (talk) 09:45, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

No idea! But I'll see what I can find out. Lova Falk talk 09:47, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Found him! http://um2017.org/faculty-history/faculty/gerald-s-blum Lova Falk talk 10:00, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Wow. Well done. What a great find. I had a look and found nothing. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:00, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Have now moved to Blacky Pictures Test. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:58, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Good job with the article! Lova Falk talk 06:57, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. And thanks also for your input at Talk:Rorschach test. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:20, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Translation of "omvorming"

Hi LOva. Could you give your opinion on the translation of "onvorming"? See Talk:Spirituality#Transformation - transmutation. No dispute going on this time, just checking! Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 06:26, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Hah!

Nice edit summary! Thanks for a laugh :) Mcewan (talk) 13:57, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome! Lova Falk talk 20:36, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Reflexogenous zones

Hi. You contribute to the article Classical conditioning very much. Unlike me, you’re a psychologist by education. So I’d like to ask your advice. The fact is any Russian textbook on physiology describes not only the concept of conditioned and unconditioned reflexes, but also their distinguishing features (for further information, see, e.g., the table at the end of an article in the Biofile journal). The article “Classical conditioning” had not contained such information before I added a new section expounding the criteria for a conditioned reflex. But a problem occurred. A property that distinguishes unconditioned reflexes from the conditioned ones is the presence of a definite receptive field. I wikified this word combination at first. Then I learned that the article “Receptive field” deals with the receptive field of a neuron. This is not tantamount to the concept “the receptive field of a reflex” (syn.: reflexogenous zone, reflexogenic zone), yes? --SU ltd. (talk) 09:45, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for asking me, but I am sorry, I cannot help you, because I don't know enough about classical conditioning. With friendly regards, Lova Falk talk 07:57, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for attention. It seems that foreign textbooks do not expound this subject as often as Russian textbooks do. Best regards, --SU ltd. (talk) 20:15, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

A number of these fine distinctions can be attributed to Pavlov, whose work is probably more broadly familiar to Russians than to western Europeans. Looie496 (talk) 16:45, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. I'm very glad to have received a professional neuroscientist's answer. Great to meet such specialists in WP where lay people (like me) are the majority. Judging from your replies and Db4wp's explanation, my wikification of the words "receptive field" is improper when they refer to a reflex. I should correct this misunderstanding and create a stub about reflexogenous zones when I have free time. Besides, I've just found a confirmation of your words about Pavlov's work and added this information to the article "Classical conditioning". Perhaps the citation added answers my question as to why the topic "Criteria for a conditioned reflex" is obligatory in Russian education and remains unknown to Western professionals at the same time. --SU ltd. (talk) 00:41, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the Barnstar!

Thanks (again) for the support, and the patrolling of my talk page! Greetings, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 15:37, 15 February 2013 (UTC) (Once again), you're very welcome! Lova Falk talk 15:43, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Help!!!

Here's this joker again! diff diff. What to do - except from just nothing, wait two days, and ask if he's got any suggestions? Greetings, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 20:03, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Oh no! At least, let it rest for tonight... I'll think about it tomorrow. Lova Falk talk 20:24, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Make it two, at least. There are better things to waste your time on. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 20:41, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

After just one night of sleep, I've given him a warning for disruptive editing diff. He's been proposing the same article at Talk:Psychedelic experience diff. Greetings, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 12:20, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Weel, we've settled the dispute at Enlightenment (spiritual), but now I've received this message from him. To me it looks like Octavious (and all the socks) are Paul Joseph. I also did som eGoogle-search on him: [18] [19] [20]. What do you make of all this? Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 05:58, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

I am sorry, but I don't know. I saw that you seem to have a fruitful dialogue but your discussions are way over my head, and it is impossible for me to see either if he is or if he is not Paul Joseph. It's also a bit funny, because both of you seem to wonder if the other is Paul Joseph... But why not sending him a mail and maybe find out more? Lova Falk talk 08:14, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Kind of "whodunnit", isn't it? Maybe I should send him an emain, if only to warn him to be carefull with advertising his own publication. He looks quite smart, and promising, and it would be a pity to have this juvenile kind of behaviour haunting him when he's on a rewarding academic career-path. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 09:48, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Good idea! Lova Falk talk 10:01, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

I've sent him an email. Thanks for your kindness; you keep reminding me to search for non-confrontational approaches in the interaction with other editors (though that's not always what you eeks, I meant "I"!!!!! - do, as you've noticed...), just by your personality. Greetings, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 06:30, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

I was very happy to read that it is this part of you that I reflect back to you. Lova Falk talk 17:13, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

All this confusion about you and I... separation is an illusion... Lova Falk talk 08:05, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank You!

Thank you very much Lova. I am working on a school project at the moment. I am not to far into the project at this time, but myself and my partner do plan to add to the Autism and working memory page. Later today we will plan to have a more definite plan on how we will approach the project and decide which parts of the article we would like to add to. We have both gone through the training tutorial for students and have a pretty good grasp on how we should add to the page, but nonetheless we are new to editing on Wikipedia. Once again thank you for your help. Wefogg (talk) 22:02, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you too for your friendly message and don't hesitate to ask if you wonder about anything. I'm looking forward to learn more about autism and wm! Lova Falk talk 07:22, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Ecological psychology

Aloha, in response to your query about the eco-psychology "criticism" entry "not being neutral," I would like to ask for clarifications about what the author means by "neutral" since "cosmic spirituality," as a form of ideology, seems to infuse and pervade her entries. The point is very basic no?: If "eco-psychology" cannot adderes these criticisms it does not merit the sub labels "eco" or "psychology." Perhaps then, "eco-psychology" as presented by the author is merely her subjective take and not an inclusive presentation deemed "neutral" Wikipedia." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.234.144.165 (talk • contribs)

Aloha! What I mean with "neutral" is representing fairly, proportionately, and as far as possible without bias, all significant views that have been published by reliable sources. Please see: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. In your edits you expressed your own opinion, for instance when you wrote "Ecopsychology" ... often neglects a full explication (deconstruction) of the basic terminology it uses to advertise its endeavors. A neutral way of describing criticism against ecopsychology is for instance writing: "Ecopsychology" has been criticized for neglecting a full explication..., ending the sentence with stating the source. With friendly regards, Lova Falk talk 05:03, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Merging SID with SPD

I have proposed that the article Sensory integration dysfunction be merged into an article on SPD that you have been involved in editing. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going to the Talk page for Sensory processing disorder (click this link to go there), and adding your comments on that discussion page. Your help in the merger might also be of value. Thank you. Popsup (talk) 20:29, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

16.000 edits

12.000 was just three months ago... What's taken possession of you? Greetings, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 19:50, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

It is the 3,528 pages on my watchlist. It is all so interesting! Plus, temporarily, lots of time. Lova Falk talk 20:00, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Students

Sorry if I caused some trouble... My plan is also to give mainly advice on sources, with the exception of the stroop effect article, where I will closely monitor editing so the articles is as improved as possible. --Garrondo (talk) 20:34, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

No need to apologize, I am very happy we have the same ideas about sources! Lova Falk talk 20:42, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

You may have not noticed, but the the course page has been changed to emphasize use of secondary sources. Morevoer, the teacher has assured me that this has been talked in class and that we must be patient both with him and students since they are all new to wikipedia. He also seemed a bit intimidated by all our messages, so it might be a good idea that we let him now that we have noticed the change (I have already done it). He has also said that the project is until summer, so that there is going to be time to go little by little with students, and that things online might go a bit slowly at first since many things are first treated offline. Finally, while I fully agree with you on the use of secondary sources and I will strain it endlessly, I have to say that that I am not sure if it is in accordance to policy to direcly eliminate content based on primary sources, specially so when most of this articles are already based primarily in primary sources. Nevertheless lets hope that we do not have to get to that. Bests. --Garrondo (talk) 21:10, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Ups, I have just noticed that you had just done that... sorry again (problem of writting before clearing the full watchlist :-). Bests. I have just seen (12 hours later) that I forgot to sign.--Garrondo (talk) 14:41, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

I agree that in some cases there might be a good reason to let primary sources stay. And I am four days behind on my watchlist so thank you for telling me this. Lova Falk talk 05:24, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Courtesy notice?

Just a thought. It might be a polite courtesy if you inform MPSchneiderLC (talk · contribs) of the help-desk discussion. As an aside, our proselytism article says "... the Catholic Church in Ad Gentes states that 'The Church strictly forbids forcing anyone to embrace the Faith, or alluring or enticing people by worrisome wiles'" --Senra (talk) 12:11, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you Senra, good idea. Lova Falk talk 12:13, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Lova Falk. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Help desk.
Message added 12:28, 24 February 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Ushau97 ^{talk contribs} 12:28, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thank you for your help, still very new to this and am very interested in improving my skills on editing, would love any advice. sorry for the mix up on the article

Destructor1988 (talk) 17:14, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Oh such a cute one! Thank you! You are not at all to blame for the article, how could you have known? Lova Falk talk 17:16, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

List of diagnostic classification and rating scales used in psychiatry

Hi! Thanks for adding some more rating scales to List of diagnostic classification and rating scales used in psychiatry :)

Hi Manicjedi, you're welcome! Lova Falk talk 19:50, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Good Humor
	You're Good Enough, You're Smart Enough, and Doggone It, People Like You! It was good to talk to you today. I wish that editors would chat like that more often. It makes it more fun to be a Wikipedia editor. Gandydancer (talk) 01:27, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Oh thank you! Such a nice start of the day. Yes, chatting with you felt good. Lova Falk talk 07:50, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Menstruation article

What is your take on this edit (which I tweaked soon after) changing the wording to "many older sources"? It's not just "many older sources" stating that; the sources for that part of line aren't too old (one's from 2004; the other is a health website that, among older references, cites a 2001 reference and a 2004 reference; though the latter 2004 reference likely doesn't mention anything about investigating premature or delayed menarche), and the source used to contrast that part of the line (from 2006) isn't that much newer (than the 2004 references at least). I've tweaked the editor's changes to that line in a different way before as well, by keeping what the editor removed while contrasting it to what the editor added.[21][22][23][24] Flyer22 (talk) 06:27, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

I am sorry Flyer22, but I don't know the first thing about menstruation and I do not know if the text about newer sources indeed reflects updated knowledge or not. However, not knowing this, and seeing that Hillarpa doesn't provide sources that makes this clear, I would say the more neutral "some sources - other sources" should be used. Just my two cents... Lova Falk talk 08:29, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Okay, thanks, Lova Falk.

By the way, as I watch your talk page, and would check back even if I didn't, you don't have to leave me a "talk back" message on my talk page. I can't remember at the moment if I relayed that to you before, but, yeah, you're free from having to notify me of any reply you make to me on your talk page. Flyer22 (talk) 08:40, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Curing phobia with hypnosis

Thank you so much for finding the hypnotherapy source. I was having trouble finding another one. Thanks for the help, now with this source my section would turn out great! -Wendy