Talk:Hypnosis

Wiki Education assignment: Research Methods in Clinical Psychology
— Assignment last updated by Bridgethorst (talk) 14:47, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Added Clinical observations of hypnosis section on page
Hello Wikipedia, for my Wikipedia Project I added a section into the hypnosis page that had a long list of sections to be included on the page. These involve a multitude of topics like Therapeutic Applications, "hypnosis" versus "hypnotism", and most importantly Clinical observations of hypnosis. Clinical observations of hypnosis is an important topic for users of Wikipedia to learn more about the process of hypnosis in the health field and the outcomes for chronically ill patients. The section added to the wikipedia page is about a meta-analysis study that included 85 controlled experiments with hypnotic induction. The results of the meta-analysis concluded that using hypnosis or hypnotic intervention is an effective tool in the pain relief of chronic illnesses. This is an important topic I believe should be on the wikipedia page as it is a beneficial tool for understanding the long lasting positive impacts hypnosis can hold. Bridgethorst (talk) 03:16, 4 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately, the section was removed as it was not written in an encyclopedic manner. —  The Hand That Feeds You :Bite 16:44, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

Article not written from a neutral point of view
The majority of this article assumes that hypnosis is effective and it references cherry-picked "data" so as to make hypnosis seem as if it is proven to to work. The claims in the article are heavily disputed in the scientific and medical communities, yet only tiny mentions of that exist here. The article appears to be compiled almost completely by its supporters, and history of the Talk page containing contrary explanations and evidence have been excised. This is a very informative article, but it's also extremely one-sided. Cernansky (talk) 18:42, 24 June 2024 (UTC)


 * WP:SOFIXIT. Please explain the specific changes you want to make, with sources. I don't see this article as violating NPOV, but it does lean a touch credulous. So I'm open to seeing new sourcing. —  The Hand That Feeds You :Bite 19:38, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

neologism
Somebody has coded the foot of this article such that it has added this article to: Category:1820s_neologisms

In doing so, that somebody have made a very serious error in fact. The term that was a "neologism" in the 1820s was hypnotism. The entity was only (sloppily) referred to as "hypnosis" in the 1890s, due to the influence of various French authors.

I have done everything that I can to change the coding at the foot of this article that generates the appearance of "hypnosis" in the category to no avail. I know that it can be done, as I have seen similar differences-from-actual-article-title displayed in category listings before, but have no idea about how to go about reversing this serious historical error. Help please. Lindsay658 (talk) 00:49, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * That change  was made just a day or so ago by user:Doomhope without any supporting evidence, so undoing the change when challenged as you have done here is easy. I don't even have to have an opinion as to whether you are correct in your assertion. Providing a source would, of course, reinforce your assertion.
 * Don't put help templates in section headers, please.  — jmcgnh (talk) (contribs) 02:34, 6 July 2024 (UTC)