User talk:Wolfdeck

Footnotes and references on ECT You need to study the   method of citation. See the Wikipedia (WP) articles Footnotes and Template messages/Sources of articles/Generic citations. Also, the end of the web address you give, you need to preserve the original case and not mix it up. In this case it should be upper case - ie.. PDF' not pdf otherwise the link won't work.

You might also need to use if all else fails; but don't ask me how it works as I have not used it yet.--Aspro 17:04, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Electroshock therapy
This is User:Wolfdeck. Wednesday, December 05, 2007 Did some research and completed a fix to balance statement for citations (3) and (4) with a different (5) citation. The reference worked well BUT it is highlighted in blue and the shows up in the reference. ?Don't know if this is normal or not? (The book is a .pdf and has no isbn # as it is a charitable donation by Leonard Roy Frank to the populace i.e. placed onto the internet for free download, unlike his other books by Random House and so on...) NOTE: I followed the template exactly with only a closing nowiki and when I used an open nowiki the html of the reference showed up as such in the reference. I am loathe to make any further changes to it. Expect that removing the nowiki and the colour in the reference - if possible is a detail that I wouldn't dream of - if possible. Shine ON* Katie

This is User:Wolfdeck. Tuesday, December 04, 2007

Made a change to introductory paragraph to add balance i.e. to replace displacement terminology. I did not expect to remove anyone's statements BUT after adding balance to a sentence, (3) (4) to add a (5) - thinking that the former (5) would just drop down to (6) - it got mostly deleted (i.e. the former (5) part.

This is the statement - Although psychiatrists generally believe that ECT does not cause brain damage, [3] [4] some critics of ECT charge there is good evidence indicating that the procedure does in fact cause brain damage.[5]

PROBLEM

This minor change has caused the reference section to go hay-wire!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I hope that this is just an alert to Wiki that someone has made a reference change and deleted a reference.

The former reference is:

Certain types of ECT have been shown to cause persistent memory loss, whereas confusion usually clears within hours of treatment.

(1) (from the former "certain types of ECT" i.e. whether ECT is given in a hospital or a "community setting" does not affect the end result - have been shown to cause "persistent memory loss" = the symptom of the brain damage)

Adding the "confusion usually clears within hours of treatment" is like debasement of amnesia for one's hard-earned skills, academic knowledge, familial relationships, etc. memory loss and way out-of-sync with the degree of harm...

Don't know why the reference page went haywire - I used the template provided for both the citation and the one offered on this page to follow?

P.S. This article is really atrocious - I can't bear to read it and Leonard hasn't the time to re-write it and I don't know enough about the HTML to input his data throughout the article anyway.

P.P.S. The way wiki was set up in 2006 was better i.e. one could input data and verify by looking at the html of the other examples. I fear that I caused the reference section to go haywire.

OOOh! Just realized didn't use the | that was in the template and this likely caused the haywire... Will fix it now!



Thanks for your very helpful edits on ECT. Just a couple of quick pointers: If you have any questions, try Help desk, or type somewhere on this talk page, and a knowledgable editor with time on his hands will "visit." Happy editing! --zenohockey 19:18, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) Don't sign your edits on the article page. If people want to know who made what edit, they can sift through a page's history (accessible via the "History" tab on the top of most pages).
 * 2) If you want to start a new thread on a talk page, it's best to do so in a new section. You can do this easily by clicking the "+" tab next to the "edit this page" tab on the top of talk pages.
 * Help—This too. --zenohockey 19:21, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi, Wolfdeck. Just to add to what Zenohockey has said, thank you for your edits. Having seen your post here before I looked at your edits, I was nervous ("this horrific practice" really got me worried!). But what you've done is just what the article needs - you've sourced some of the anti-ECT sentiment in the article, which was greatly needed and is much appreciated. A lot of folk new to Wikipedia come in and are all blood, thunder, and terrible editing etiquette - so thank you very much both for your additions and for your restraint!
 * 1) Second, you may find Templates for citations useful. Although there's no specific way of linking to an ebook, if the definitive text is a pdf, all you need to do is to cite it using the book template and include the url:

|

That said, it's fine as Zenohockey has included it too! Nmg20 21:10, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

ECT
John, I was looking through the article history and I just saw your name linked to this username. Hey again! Well, the excerpt from your book that I quoted on the article has now been removed. I left a note on that user's talk page, but there isn't much else I can do, without starting a flame war or an edit war or getting banned, all of which I will not do. Best wishes to you and I will continue to support your work.

Chris Dubey 02:03, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Can't Fix the reference section
As the # of reference clearly works to go to the reference section - decided this is not the problem.

As the reference should show up even if in error and nothing shows up - figure the mess in the reference section because I tried to make a change is built into Wiki when one deletes a reference - to alert someone or something to verify the change! Hope so! The change improves the whole article tremendously ie. adding some balance to the propaganda.

The help section is no help with this!

Again, preferred the 2006 way of showing the whole reference section rather than a blank sheet to do the reference - so that we could check with the other references as a guide/sample. Still feel I did something wrong to cause the reference not to show up and the rest to become gobbledy gook.

NO ELECTROSHOCK article should be written without Leonard Roy Frank's definitive quotationary -- the reference needs to be added in AND IT SHOULD NEVER BE DELETED AGAIN! The Electroshock Quotationary is about REVEALING TRUTH and NOT BURYING IT! It's not opinion, but revealing truth by quoting over 1/2C of written articles on ECT by those who promote(d) it - revealing both themselves and their "work".

Shine ON* Katie P.S. Let me introduce you to Harold Sackeim... Harold Sackeim, Psychologist, Professor Columbia University (considered to be the U.S. top ECT researcher) admitted to Electroconvulsive Therapy Causing Permanent Amnesia And Cognitive Deficits, which affect individuals' ability to function. (Journal Neuropsychopharmacology, January 2007) after 25 years of stating, that the controversial treatment “doesn't cause permanent amnesia and, in fact, improves memory and increases intelligence” oft remarking that “permanent amnesia from ECT is so rare that it could not be studied”, while asserting that “most people who said the treatment erased years of memory were mentally ill and thus not credible”. The National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) estimates that more than 3 million people have received ECT over the past generation. www.medicalnewstoday.com “Since the mid-1980s, Sackeim worked as a consultant to the ECT device manufacturer Mecta Corp. He never revealed his financial interest in ECT to NIMH, as required by federal law, and, until 2002, did not reveal it to New York officials as required by state law … nor did Sackeim disclose his financial conflict when his NIMH grant was renewed to 2009 at approximately $500,000 per year.” Committee for Truth in Psychiatry http://www.nature.com/npp/journal/v32/n1/pdf/1301180a.pdf