User talk:Badgerbear

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Badgerbear, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!  — Scientizzle 22:47, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. Please always observe our core policies. Also, if you wish to comment on an article, use the discussion page instead of the article itself. That's what the talk page is there for. Thanks. Deli nk 12:18, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Brain zaps

Regarding brain zaps and whatnot...I'm new to the subject, having never heard of it until I saw it on Special:Recentchanges, so I don't have all the information yet I'm sure. I'm concerned about the coverage here on Wikipedia (hence my talk page additions & content tags)--there's almost no published material regarding the phenomenon (the two instances I found are on the talk page). What there is is a whole lot of internet forum postings.

That leaves us with almost no reliably sourced information from which to build a properly verifiable and neutral article. In fact, the article is largely in the realm of original research.

I propose that the article get drastically cut down, essentially to a distillation the content of the single paper on the subject, and with any information we might be able to dig up from proper sources--since you seem more in tune with the syndrome & community, have you come across any additional sources that might meet Wikipedia policies and guideline (newspaper coverage, for example)? The entire Mechanism of Action section, for example, is pure non-medical speculation and should be, in my opinion, axed.

I bring this up here because you seem to be one of the more prominent workers on these articles and I'd like to work together to get these articles to meet Wikipedia standards while still providing useful information. — Scientizzle

[edit] Belated responses

Sorry I've taken a while to get back to you: moving = no internet connection for a while...

I look forward to properly sourcing & cleaning up brain zaps. Incidentally, what is the relationship between brain zaps and SSRI discontinuation syndrome? Should they be merged? I'm not familiar enough with the clinical side effects to know for sure myself.

Sorry about the lost note--that can be a real pain. (I've had that problem before, but it rarely happens when I use Firefox, for some reason--you might try it.) in any case, Paroxetine does have some advert-like material. It certainly needs better sourcing. I'll work in the near future to provide links to academic papers discussing the drug.

Let me be perfectly clear up front--I'm not an expert in SSRIs or their clinical applications & effects, but I am a researcher in a related field, working in academia, and much more comfortable talking about the molecular actions of drugs than any clinical stuff. One thing that bothers me is the constant tug-of-war between two competing points of view (in this case, pharma reps apparently scrubbing reputations versus those that have had unpleasant interactions with this drug) on Wikipedia. I'm rather commited to the NPOV policy and tend to greet every claim with with cool skepticism until I can see some proper sourcing. When I first saw "brain zaps", I was skeptical of it being anything more than a vague heterogenous conglomeration of somewhat similar symptoms that may or may not have anything to do with the drugs being taken (internet forums are notorious hypochondria breeding grounds and anecdotal evidence is the worst kind of evidence)...somewhat similar to the single academic publication on the topic in which the author gave some specualtion that the condition may be largely explained by a variety of fairly common and more well-understood symptom phenomena. With all this in mind, it's my goal to make these topics, and every other topic I edit here, as academically rigorous and as neutral as possible. Hopefully, working together, you can help me find reliable sources that present the side of the story from which you're coming, and I can find complimentary academic research to create the full picture. Cheers, — Scientizzle 18:35, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, I'm back in town, but I'll still be of limited availability for at least a few more days...
I never interpreted your (ahem) enthusiasm as anything negative, so don't worry. It's good to know our biases up front (I'm partial to studies easily accessed on PubMed, for example). As I'm certain delving into these topics will require substantial time & energy, it may be a few more days until I can be of any use 'round those parts. Until then, keep on keeping on. And do your best to meet WP:NPOV. :)
PS-You have a tendency when you edit to make a lot of small changes over and over, such that a paragraph of text has 20 or so edits to it (talk pages and articles, alike). I'd encourage greater use of the preview button, or an off-wiki program (MS Word or something) to help you avoid this--it's frustrating when trying to edit or respond to a message and always running into edit conflicts. Cheers, — Scientizzle 19:21, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Smile

Connell66 has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

[edit] Duplicate images uploaded

Thanks for uploading Image:Snl89186.jpg. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:SNL Sprocketstitlescreen.jpg. The copy called Image:SNL Sprocketstitlescreen.jpg has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.

This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone, and you do not need to respond. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and refer to 'my contributions' to remind yourself exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot (talk) 06:44, 28 January 2008 (UTC)