Talk:Deficits in attention, motor control and perception

I
I added a warning since I don't have the time to fix the problems right now. See this talk page for background. --Denis Diderot 10:14, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

This article was orginally a section that I wrote for the article Christopher Gillberg. After that section was written, Denis Diderot objected as follows.
 * ... the section devotes too much space to criticism. There must be balance. (The quotes from Rutter and Rydelius could be used, but they have to be put in a proper context and balanced by other opinions.) ... --Denis Diderot 17:57, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

This objection seems unwarranted, because virtually no one outside the Gillberg group has considered DAMP even worthy of study: Gillberg himself acknowledged this (and the article contains a citation for that). Also, the quotes are in context. &mdash;Daphne A 04:31, 23 August 2006 (UTC)


 * This is not the only problem, but it's certaintly part of the problem. What you perhaps don't fully appreciate is that "DAMP" is just a term. Medical researchers don't do research on terms, that's for linguists. They also don't do research on concepts, that's for philosophy and allied disciplines. The research has been on children with DAMP, or "ADHD with DCD", or "hyperkinetic disorder with a developmental disorder of motor function", or whatever you may prefer to call it. The research on DAMP has been used and cited in hundreds of papers by researchers outside the Gillberg group, even when these other researchers don't use the term "DAMP". And yes the quotes were put in a context by you, but not the proper context. --Denis Diderot 07:10, 23 August 2006 (UTC)


 * This looks like more sophistic word games. Also Gillberg himself said that virtually all other researchers (beside his co-workers) were ignoring DAMP.  And what is the "proper context"?  Your response does not seem to address the points in the article.  &mdash;Daphne A 08:33, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

DAMP's future
Deficits in Attention, Motor control and Perception, which is the combination of ADHD and Developmental Coordination Disorder, has a notability tag. Since the idea has largely been ignored or rejected, and it doesn't seem to have gained significant traction outside of the close associates of the proposer at any point, a stand-alone article is probably not the best way to present it.

We need to resolve this notability issue one way or another. Here are some options which will prevent outright deletion:
 * merge a basic description into ADHD, perhaps as a single paragraph in the history section, or perhaps into a section on comorbidities.
 * merge most of the information into the Christopher Gillberg article.
 * simply redirect it to the Christopher Gillberg article, which already contains a basic description of DAMP.

In any case, I expect that basic information, not details, will be wanted. If you have any opinions on this, please leave a message here. You can reply in a "vote" style (* Merge to...) if you want, but I'd like to know your reasons as well as your recommendation. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:21, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * In the absence of any response, I have merged the information into Christopher Gillberg. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:31, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I see the Americans have been here
DAMP is currently being diagnnosed in the United Kingdom 2009. We do not all live by USA definitions and of conditions and disabilities, may be those who live in the USA should try to research and understand other cultures outsided of their geograhical boundaries and develop a more global view of life which is the WIKI aim.

dolfrog (talk) 01:39, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

DAMP now being more widely diagnosed
DAMP is now being diagnosed in the UK as the smaller componets of the larger spectrums are becoming increasingly identified as we develop the technology to understand the workings of the brain. Parents of children diagnosed as having DAMP need as much information they can find to help them understand the problems their children are experiencing.

So there is a need to find present day research which is used to support this diagnosis which is gaining wider universal approval

dolfrog (talk) 02:00, 28 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Not sure I follow what is being proposed in this and the previous section. How could the article be improved? Totorotroll (talk) 09:20, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Deficits in attention, motor control and perception. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070930061114/http://svt.se/svt/jsp/Crosslink.jsp?d=6107&a=400673 to http://svt.se/svt/jsp/Crosslink.jsp?d=6107&a=400673
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070929185905/http://www.fetalneonatal.com/cgi/eletters/88/10/904 to http://www.fetalneonatal.com/cgi/eletters/88/10/904

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:23, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Title
Does it not seem fitting to have every word in the title be capitalized, especially in being an acronym? I think it would also be benefited by including the acronym in the title, so it is searchable as "DAMP" as well. As is, at first sight, it just logically seemed to me to be a page on an apparent connection between these things, but not any sort of term. For that reason, it seems misleadingly unfitting to be a Wikipedia article. Now I know it is right in having its own page. But it would be aided by a title such as "DAMP (Deficits in Attention, Motor Control and Perception)" or "Deficits in Attention, Motor Control and Perception (DAMP)." The page for ADHD only has the full name of the disorder without the acronym, and is also not capitalized, but is searchable by "ADHD" I assume because the first words of the page, where the name is included, it says "Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)." I don't know the reasons behind why acronyms are not capitalized in their titles, but it seems worthy of consideration. Susanna Neal (talk) 22:06, 5 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Susanna, Wikipedia's practice is to use sentence case in titles. So, this means to capitalize the first word and proper names. So the lowercase words are normal practice for us. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 20:34, 1 May 2021 (UTC)