Talk:Dysaesthesia aethiopica

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

United States History Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history of the United States on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United States HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject United States HistoryTemplate:WikiProject United States HistoryUnited States History articles

Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject United States History To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Cleanup : United States History articles needing attention
Infobox : United States History articles needing infoboxes
Stubs : Stub-Class United States History articles, Category:United States history stubs
Other :
- Place either of the following WikiProject banners on United States History-related articles and assess:
  - {{WikiProject United States History|class=|importance=}}
  - {{WikiProject United States|class=|importance=|UShistory=Yes|UShistory-importance=}}

Medicine Low‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Psychology Low‑importance

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

African diaspora Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject African diaspora, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of African diaspora on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.African diasporaWikipedia:WikiProject African diasporaTemplate:WikiProject African diasporaAfrican diaspora articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Human rights Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

merge

Propose merge. Three small articles on essentially same topic prevents a clear picture. Articles are split off from main preventing a whole picture from emerging:

Dysaethesia Aethiopica (this article) +
Drapetomania +
Samuel A. Cartwright.

The effect is to trivialize all three articles. --Mattisse 02:12, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Cartwright himself is certainly important enough for his own article. Drapetomania seems to have a life of its own beyond Cartwright's writings, do it probably should have its own. I merged Dysaethesia Aethiopica with Cartwright's article, but someone else gave it its own article. That's fine with me. It is more important that lots of things on WP. The Drapetomania article should be expanded with more information on its ongoing importance. Cartwright's article should be expanded with more information on his other contributions beyond these two "disorders." Basic information on the "disorders" and their history should continue to be included in Cartwright's article. That's my opinion. I don't think anyone is trying to trivialize anything. Steve Dufour 16:45, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I still wonder what she means by "trivialize." Steve Dufour, you have to keep in mind her earlier actions with Drapetomania. She tried to have it deleted in order to, in essence, trivialize it because she didn't want it to corrupt the legacy of Psychiatry. And I'm not jumping to conclusions here; she said it. - Cyborg Ninja 21:58, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It seems clear to me that Mattisse is saying that three short articles may not be as effective as one longer article; that the shorter articles "trivialize" their subjects, but a single article would produce a "clear picture" of Cartwright and his diseases. — Malik Shabazz (Talk | contribs) 22:10, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like a pretty intelligent idea, wonder why it's not done yet. All of these articles combined certainly isn't too long. 173.180.202.22 (talk) 07:38, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion of Vanessa Jackson and MindFreedom International as WP:RS

The following discussion is copied verbatim from User talk:Addhoc#Dysaethesia Aethiopica. I've inserted a line at the end of the copied material. — Malik Shabazz (Talk | contribs) 23:42, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand why you added a "check" tag to Dysaethesia Aethiopica. The sentence in question has a footnote reference to a document on the web, including a page number. Any reader can easily verify the source, so I'm not sure why the tag is there. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz (Talk | contribs) 21:15, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure whether the MindFreedom International website is a reliable source.--Addhoc 21:51, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's a reliable source for the sentence from the woman who criticizes Cartwright, isn't it? It's not being offered as a reliable source for anything else. — Malik Shabazz (Talk | contribs) 23:03, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, advocacy websites aren't usually considered reliable. Addhoc 23:06, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

With respect to the issues about which they advocate. This is hardly an extremist position or a fringe theory. Also, this article is an external link in both this article and Drapetomania. (The external link is a reprint; my footnote is the original source.)

Do you mind if I copy this discussion to Talk:Dysaethesia Aethiopica, where other editors can contribute? — Malik Shabazz (Talk | contribs) 23:32, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, good idea. Fully agree this a legitimate external link, and for the avoidance of doubt concur they aren't extremist or fringe. Addhoc 23:34, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]