User talk:*Kat*

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

• archive

Contents 1 Re:Honorverse 2 Your AMA statement was deleted 3 RE: Table on Honorverse Characters 4 Uklandscape 5 Thank you 6 Coffee's GA nomination 7 Thanks *Kat* 8 ADHD FAC 9 Regarding Association of Members' Advocates 10 Wanted to provide some insight....

[edit] Re:Honorverse

I'd be happy to help, but do we need a project? I certainly have my hands full with others and could not find time to organize other projects :( Do you know User:Fabartus? He is another barfly active on Wiki and would surely be interested.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 23:03, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

PS. I think the most urgent task is to clear this mess.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 23:24, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Added Hades (Honorverse) to Hades (disambiguation), I'm surprised it wasn't there already... (Patrick 23:25, 11 July 2006 (UTC))

Another user adding much honorverse content is User:Yyyyyyyyyyy. I do think it would be nice to have some common discussion page, but perhaps Talk:Honorverse is enough?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 23:02, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your AMA statement was deleted

Your AMA statement was deleted apparently carelessly from the AMA statements page (see this edit)if your statement needs to be restored, the text is at User:Pedant/AMA error Pedant 02:07, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RE: Table on Honorverse Characters

Nothing to be sorry about, it's a valuable addition to the article, kudos for it :) But perhaps we could 'thin it out' by removing some elements repeated in every line...?-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus  talk}  14:32, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Uklandscape

Hi, you left Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Uklandscape incomplete. I (after a bit of puzzling as to what had gone wrong) completed the nomination. Hopefully you didn't change your mind halfway through, as it's been fully nominated for deletion now. --Xyzzyplugh 10:46, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

Thank you for your efforts on the List of Honorverse characters -- Heptite (T) (C) (@) 06:15, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Coffee's GA nomination

Hello! I saw you left a comment that only a minor thing is needed to be fixed to pass that article. I have concerns about it:

• the article has several bracket structures (it could be really disturbing to read the text among these)
• it has 2 citation needed templates.

I think we should wait until these suggestions are fixed. Thanks. NCurse _work 14:50, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks *Kat*

Hey Kat, thank you for supporting my recent RfA. It passed with an amazing final tally of 160/4/1. I really appreciate your support and I will do my best to ensure that I don't let anyone down. Cheers, Sarah Ewart (Talk) 04:55, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ADHD FAC

Kat, I know my review may seem harsh to you: my disappointment is with the GA process, which is ineffective and misleading. So many people show up on FAC with an article that just received GA, which means ... nothing. An unreferenced article should never have passed GA, period, and the article is lacking far too many inline citations. I know what you're up against, and the article probably get slammed by all sorts of speculative edits, but if you will thoroughly reference the article, with the highest possible quality sources, you will probably find that the speculative edits will stop, as they did when I rewrote Tourette syndrome. Best, Sandy 21:46, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for saying that. I was a bit stung by your criticism. The thing is, I thought I did have the article fully referenced. There aren't any inline citations because we put all the references down at the bottom of the page.--*Kat* 20:35, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm truly sorry for that, Kat. I probably hit you with a pretty big stick, and it was probably cumulative frustration at the ineffective GA process, finally coming to FAC in a subject area I understood well enough to realize all of the problems with GA promotions, coupled with the frustration at there not being enough other editors to help. Perhaps some of what I went through in developing the TS article will help orient your work. I've been working on it for eight months: it took a lot of networking to eventually find the people who could/would help - it seems there are very few editors who know TS, and that includes the physicians. The Medicine WikiProjects never took an active role, even though I appealed to them many times, but my appeals generated enough interest from a few of the WikiPhysicians who gave me advice about certain aspects of writing a medical article on Wiki and helped with medical peer review. Through my involvement at FAC, I learned who the best copyeditors are. Once the article was better referenced and organized by WP:MEDMOS, the vandalism and speculative edits slowed to a manageable pace: referencing absolutely everything to medical sources will really help organize your work. Organizing the content to more or less follow WP:MEDMOS forced me to realize where the article was lacking. Along the way, the helpful editors I found peeked in on my progress. I met some great editors, and developed my own peer review system, independent of the Peer Review it had or the Projects or the silly GA. You're up against a lot with the speculative edits that occur in ADHD: I hope you can begin the networking process, locate some of the WikiPhysicians who may be knowledgeable about ADHD to help, and if I can be of any help, that you'll let me know. I've had to learn about ADHD because of the comorbidity with TS: I don't have time to get involved in depth with the article, but if you can begin to address some of the stuff I've mentioned, I can continue to peek in on your progress, as so many others did for me. My suggestion of the two most urgent needs the article has is to 1) take a look at the MEDMOS structure to see where your content area weaknesses are, and 2) get rid of all of the references which aren't top-quality medical references: there is too much disagreement in the field to be relying on sources like ADDResources, Suite101, and so on. The article right now has some information from speculative or non-peer-reviewed sources: you need the best medical consensus to write an encyclopedic article. Again, I'm sorry for the big stick, Best, Sandy 21:38, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Apology accepted. I can understand your frustration. The person who reviewed the article for GA status was a doctor himself, but also fairly new to Wikipedia. Thanks for the advice, I'll definitely be following it. I'm surprised TS is controversial enough to warrant speculative edits. ADHD really hasn't had too much trouble with that sort of thing since Bishonen cleaned up the Positive Aspects and Alternative treatments sections.

I think he's actually a biochemist. He is very well meaning and hard working, but he also conferred the GA to TS, when the article was not comprehensive, not thoroughly referenced, and needed a copy edit :-) It's really hard to find someone on Wiki who knows neuropsychiatric conditions: in fact, I don't think there is anyone. Sandy 22:16, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding Association of Members' Advocates

Hi, you are receiving this message because you have listed yourself as an active member of WP:AMA. If you aren't currently accepting inquiries for AMA, or if you have resigned, please de-list yourself from Wikipedia:AMA Members. If you are still active, please consider tending to any new requests that may appear on Category:AMA Requests for Assistance. We're going to put AMA on wheels. :) Sorry for the template spamming - we're just trying to update our records, after we had a huge backlog earlier in the week (if you've been taking cases, then sorry, and please ignore this :)). Again, sorry, and thanks! Martinp23 21:12, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wanted to provide some insight....

Thanks for responding to my postings with a little thought rather than categorical rejection, but then you have always been open minded even when you disagreed with me. As for your experience you may be right. I don't know. But you could be wrong. The quotes were illustrating that even people without ADHD found that drudgery turned into fun. Getting any child to do something that is not pleasurable is a challenge. Freud's discussions of moving children from the pleasure principle to the reality principle is very relevant for all people. There are always bumps in the road and scars left behind. Getting children to "behave" (meaning do what we want them to do rather than what they want to do)was and will always be difficult If you go over my many posts in the discussion sections you will find Castellanos speculations on what he thinks stimulants do by releasing the reward chemical, dopamine. His conclusions are identical to mine (although he feels the problem is fundamentally biological) Interestingly not only bored imprisoned children's minds go elsewhere but anyone who feels they are overmatched, dominated etc. The mind shuts down. Thoughts and actions become twice as difficult im comparison to when we feel capable, stimulated, interested etc. Anyway many depressed people find they can't think, or find everything dull, or too much for them. Dopmamine (in the form of Wellbutrin) brings back their sense of mastery and initiative. So does Ritaline, cocaine, amphetamines (such as Adderall). We don't use these except when we are desperate but they will completely turn around the person's mood.

As for athletes using performance enhancing drugs. Feeling in the attack mode, rather than back on your heels, is a key component in performing well. Hence the "home team advantage" or when you have fans that boo their own players, the home team disadvantage (e.g. Beltran and lately ERod.) When athletes feel up, when they go into a hitting streak and are hot they perform better. When they are in slump the harder they try the worse they become. They turn on themselves, doubt, hesitate, go up to the plate half defeated before they take a swing. So yes something is lacking with ADHD children that is self perpetuating. They don't have a can do feeling, they become easily frustrated, tune out, antsy. Entertaining teachers, a subject that comes easily, or catches their fancy, fun games, supply what the Ritaline artificially does, the same feeling that athletes get when they are in a hitting streak and the fans are cheering. How parents and cultures supply that for their children is the subject of my article (that has been removed from the board). The problem is not with attention per se but with being able to remain on task

I can't tell you how satisfying it is to finally reach someone who wants to discuss the issues Would you mind, by the way if I put your comments and my reply on the general discussion page.