User talk:MathewTownsend

Welcome![change source]

Welcome to Wikipedia, MathewTownsend! I'm Osiris and an active editor here. Thank you for your changes. I just wanted to say hi and welcome you to Wikipedia! If you have any questions check out Wikipedia:Questions, or send me a message on my talk page. I like to help new people, so don't be afraid to leave a message! I hope you like Wikipedia and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Osiris (talk) 00:51, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! MathewTownsend (talk) 00:56, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Phrasal verbs[change source]

Hi Mathew,

Have a look at the second section of my talk page - Eptalon indicated we should avoid "phrasal verbs" (i.e. used "ascend" instead of "go up"; use "extinguish" instead of "put out"), and you added one in this diff ("making anything up" versus "faking"). I notice I did exactly the same thing in my set of previous edits, so I'll have to correct that.

Looks like "simple" is mostly about grammar and sentence structure, not vocabulary. I've been imagining I was explaining things to a child, but even being a child assumes familiarity with idioms. This is the biggest stylistic gaffe I've made to date, I thought you might find it a useful tip too. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 18:16, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, MathewTownsend. You have new messages at WLU's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

You might find WP:HOW useful. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 18:53, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes! Thanks! I didn't have a clue before. I thought it was about making the article easier to understand, jargon free etc., and it isn't at all apparently. I don't think "faking" and "making up" are synonymous. But, oh well. MathewTownsend (talk) 19:03, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm at a loss to explain folie à deux in simple English wiki terms, but that seems to be at least close to the appropriate term. The entire page is hard to write about since you have to go back to Charcot and related topics to show this isn't the first time an explanation like this has been proposed in psychiatry/psychology. WP:HOW links to a couple other pages which might be useful too. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 19:20, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know. Editing here may be over my head. "a mental disorder where delusional beliefs are transmitted from one individual to another"? MathewTownsend (talk) 19:40, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"a mental disorder in which two people shard the same delusions"? MathewTownsend (talk) 19:42, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I don't know either, I'm going to let it percolate for a while. The idea that a mental disorder could be induced by a therapist on an easily influenced patient is counter-intuitive, you have to know about the history of psychiatry to realize that it is not just a potential issue - it has actually happened! I think though, simple does mean SIMPLE - articles should be shorter and contain less detail than en.wiki. That means we don't have to explain every nuance and controversy, only point out that it is there. Maybe it's under your head, not over it :)

What sort of scripts were helping you edit on wikipedia? The only one I use here or on en.wiki is popups, and it never really helped me with the writing, just navigation, checking wikilinks and the like. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 19:47, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have a boat load of scripts, especially javascripts that do all sorts of things - identify faulty refs, format refs correctly, format dashes correctly, etc., I forget what all. I just imported a css format script which works to help me locate my name. I don't think the js scripts will work because they rely on importing another user's scripts. User:Smith609 has a toolbox script, and User:GregU has a script that fixes dashes, User:Dr pda gives page size and allows you easy editing of references and helps with DYK. User:Ohconfucius has four scripts to format common dates, remove excess links, recognize errors in harv refs (in big red letters) and general formating help, and User:Ucucha has several. I'd have to get their actual scripts (which are very long) and copy them here to see if they would work. Not worth it I don't think. On wp I do so much reviewing that the scripts are great, but here I don't think the standards are the same anyway. MathewTownsend (talk) 20:11, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Gimme a bit[change source]

I'm still massaging it, I was planning on moving it to epidemiology. I'm still in mid-edit, the causes section is a bitch to work with. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 16:21, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

'K, I'm done for now at least. I hit some edit conflicts with you, I integrated the latest one, but I think the one before that was OK since it was a relocation of the material I was moving around anyway. My apologies for over-writing, and if I messed anything up please fix it. Note that the ref name tag for Lynn 2012 is <ref name = Lynn/>, I keep screwing that up.

Man, edit conflicts suck. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 16:55, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]