User talk:NootropicsHistorian

Welcome!

Hello, NootropicsHistorian, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Zefr (talk) 00:24, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

History and etymology

Hello. On my talk page, you said: "I am a historian working on gathering as much of the original source material on the nootropic concept as is available. I am especially focused on the origins of the nootropic concept as introduced by Corneliu Giurgea in 1972. I have spent an inordinate amount of time gathering a fairly complete record of all major papers related to the nootropic concept, including all retrospectives he wrote on the nootropic concept, including his only published long-form book on the topic.

One thing that bothered me and made me register is that for years I wanted to correct a longstanding inaccuracy of basic information such as the Greek root of "trepein" meaning to "bend or turn" when really it was clearly and repeatedly stated by Giurgea that the term is derived from the Greek root "tropein" and meant "towards," with the full translation of the word "nootropic" as "towards the mind."

I noticed you created an etymology section, which seems to be an appropriate place for discussing the roots of the concept, yet removed much of what I included for that reference. I was simply including Giurgea's own words around the context of the coining of the concept. I thought I had properly sourced that information and even hand typed the quotes from the original source material in my citations...

How would I go about properly structuring it so that could be included there? Or should there instead be a History section instead or something like that? Or is it your position that the context related to the coining of the nootropic concept is not relevant to the entry on nootropics and the nootropic concept?"

I felt corrections to your edit here were needed to state just the essential information for the encyclopedia per WP:NOTTEXTBOOK and WP:NOTEVERYTHING. Your username suggests a rather narrow focus on one topic - which is a Start class article, so I hope you'll carry your interest in history to other articles. The Nootropic etymology section contains sufficient historical and encyclopedic information for the general reader on how the term was derived. You may wish to have more information, but I felt most of your edit was extraneous textbook or journal content. From a 1972 source, we seem to have enough content and represent the Giurgea origin adequately. If you still disagree, I suggest raising the issue on the article talk page for other editors to review. Following you here if you want to discuss further. Good luck. --Zefr (talk) 00:45, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]