Talk:Clinical lycanthropy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I'm adding this note to attribute the bulk of the material I just added to the article to User:Vaughan, who wrote it up for a Kuro5hin article and gave me permission to copy into here. I did some editing in the process of pasting, but didn't add much work of my own. Bryan 20:28, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)

i thaught this was spelled lyncanthropy.... for the medical state

Gabrielsimon 21:45, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I have never heard of that, and Google only finds obvious cases of misspelling when I do a search for it. Do you have any references? Bryan 00:12, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

cf Furries?

Clinical lycanthropy is not closely related to furry fandom. Most of furry fandom isn't even particularly shapeshifting-oriented from what I've seen of it. Bryan 00:12, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] unlinking see also

I do not beleive that Therianthropy has anything to do with clinical lycanthropy, simply because Clinical Lycanthropy is a medical condition, and Therianthropy is more of a spiritual belief, most of the time, thus the link was removed.Gavin the Chosen 16:44, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Judging from how the articles define these topics, they are indeed quite closely related IMO. Clinical lycanthropy is the most verifiable type of therianthropy. Friday (talk) 16:49, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

with no mention of Therianthropy in the article anywhere else, it doesn't seem to be in good form to put the see also link there. Gavin the Chosen 16:56, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Trying to remove the mention is a highly biased action from someone going around all the related articles trying to remove any possible mention of anything that might even indirectly put bad light onto a subculture to which Gabrielsimon aka Gavin the Chosen self-identifies. Removing the link simply will not be tolerated. DreamGuy 17:22, August 23, 2005 (UTC)

agai, with n no mention of therianthropy in the article, the link is extraneous, and added by DreamGuy, so no wonder he, who thinks he owns the site, seemingly, wants to preserve what he put in. but with no ,mention of it in the article, as of this time, there's no reason to have it at all. Gavin the Chosen 17:37, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

There's a "see also" going the other way around. Clearly the topics are related. I see no reason at all not to include it. Friday (talk) 17:41, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

On the contrary, if therianthropy had been mentioned in the article, it would be linked there, and there would be no need for a "See Also" link. Because it is not mentioned in the article, it could be a "See Also." FreplySpang (talk) 00:57, August 24, 2005 (UTC)

the point is that since this subject has absolutely nothing to do with herianthropy, then the see also link doesn't belong. that's almost like on the emperor penguins page say see also, emperor... makes no sense!Gavin the Chosen 02:07, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Just because two things are not the same does not mean that they are unrelated. The point of See Also, as I see it, is to lead the reader to other articles that may be of interest. Someone reading about clinical lycanthropy may easily find the article on therianthropy useful. I think that Gavin's point is that linking the two articles implies that therians are clinical lycanthropes. I couldn't disagree more. Indeed, I think that the link can just as easily serve to imply the opposite, depending on the viewpoint of the reader. This is the essence of NPOV: letting the readers draw their own conclusions. Mistercow 16:56, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Well said, and I agree. If they were the same thing, there would hardly be two different articles, right? I think the link should be there, and as you said, readers can draw their own conclusions. Friday (talk) 17:01, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Question:

Is this condition a perminant belief that one has become an animal of some type, or is it a shifting-back-and-forth thing - IE, do Clinical Lycanthropes believe they are in human form at some times, and animal form at other times, or do they believe they are always in animal form? Thanks! Hipocrite 20:03, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

PS: I'd appreciate answers phrased in the form of: "I am a professional in the field, and," "The following source written by a professional in the field says:"

some of each. some of them kinda go feral, and othgers only do so at certain times.Gavin the Chosen 20:05, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

This answer is not acceptable. I hope that someone who is interested in getting the answer right, rather than winning whatever argument you're having at the moment will get back to me. Hipocrite 20:24, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

so you can nopt find the truth acceptable? strange. perhaps you just donmt like that its coming from me, considering that youve tried to place trather degrading lables and headers above my words, and simply deleted it from your talk page when i asked you to stop. whatever happened to assuming good faith? a policeyu your OBVIOUSLY not following.Gavin the Chosen 20:33, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Lunar Influence

This section was added by an anon. It looks completely unsupported and most of it's probably original research, but maybe something should be mentioned in the article about it one way or the other since it's probably a common idea. Bryan 06:43, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

It is widely accepted that the solar body decides our sense of coordination, emotion, and general comfortableness. The moon's cycle of 28 days(a lunar month) decides a woman's menstrual cycle, when eggs are laid for various birds and amphibians. It has obviously been also linked to lycanthropy in that generally most cases ocurred not on the full month/moon but exactly two weeks before it. The moon's presidence in the night sky determines air pressure on inland ares up to 350km from shore, amount of visible light at night, aggresiveness of animals and insect to mate and hunt, and the emotional mood of a person. It has never been studied but it is suspected that nocturnal individuals and animals levels of adrenaline tend to rise in the light of a full moon.