This user may have left Wikipedia. Earlypsychosis has not edited Wikipedia since January 15, 2013. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

Hi. You asked about an earlier version of this article that I deleted. I deleted it because it was a copy of another webpage, namely http://www.osmhi.org/?page=171 . We don't accept material copied from other places (except under some very specific conditions). Assuming that your new version of the article is not copied, it should be fine. And welcome to Wikipedia! You might want to check out our welcome page for some tips about working on Wikipedia. Cheers, FreplySpang 02:45, 20 December 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've conducted the change for you. In a few days your account will be autoconfirmed via email, and then you will be able to edit semi-protected pages such as Schizophrenia. This is a security feature to help prevent vandalism from non-registered and newly registered users, it's only applied to articles which are highly viewed or vandalised.

Anyway, you're change has been added. Thanks for your contributions! —Cyclonenim (talk · contribs · email) 12:50, 21 December 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Would you like to be my adoptee??? --Miagirljmw14 Miagirljmw~talk 19:00, 31 December 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Looks like a difficult topic. As I said on the talk page. There need to be more acceptance and determination of the cause before you can find truly effective preventative measures.--Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:49, 2 February 2009 (UTC) I dont agree. Earlypsychosis (talk) 19:31, 14 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of IEPA, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.iepa2008.com/Hosts.html. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 10:37, 16 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The IEPA aims are a direct copy for the article. Working on how to cite and/or reference this Earlypsychosis (talk) 11:11, 16 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for your message on my talkpage. I replied to you there. Cheers! -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 12:18, 16 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Basically, you search for the paper title in pubmed, then paste the pmid number (shown under the abstract) in Diberri's tool which generates the code you can paste in the wiki. See WP:PMID for details. Xasodfuih (talk) 01:28, 20 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

((adoptoffer)) Hey, I saw that you were requesting for an adopter, so I'd like to offer to adopt you. I'm an experienced editor with over 8000 edits, so if you have any questions, I'll probably have the answer. Please drop me a message on my talk page if you're interested. -download | sign! 21:18, 21 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Alright, I've created my adoptee's classroom, so feel free to read it. You probably know everything there, but if you need any help with the scripts section I'd be glad to help. -download | sign! 03:07, 22 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'd also recommend watching it, so you can see when I reply to your questions if you haven't done so already. -download | sign! 20:46, 22 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Earlypsychosis. You have new messages at Download's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.

no problem, in fact i did not mean to do like that way, sorry if that bothers anyone Thabet202 (talk) 22:11, 6 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have been working to create an organized categorization of pharmacology articles at WT:PHARM:CAT, and, if avaliable, wanted to get your feedback on that page? kilbad (talk) 18:07, 13 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You wrongly accused me of "gaming the system" and doing a bias revert, which is not the case. I explained in the edit history that mwalla I had recently reverted (and I also reported them and they got blocked for 1 week) for vandalism on another article. Their response was to change my edits. They have a history of doing this to multiple users if they revert their vandalism hence why they got blocked for a week. They are also under investigation for using sock puppets. The refs are on prescribed use. Prescribed use is not abuse. They only made those edits as a revenge edit, they always do this not just to me but a number of editors.--Literaturegeek | T@1k? 18:26, 19 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I didnt accuse you, I accused both of you. I stand by that. the claim of vandalism was unfounded and your revert edits made the article on depression worse. Please keep discussion to the depression talk page. Earlypsychosis (talk) 18:32, 19 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 20:15, 30 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for your help over this.Ranger2006 (talk) 18:49, 29 April 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

no problem. the article is looking good. the next challenge is to move toward incorporating this material or perspectives into the hallucinations and psychosis topics Earlypsychosis (talk) 20:14, 30 April 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

		The Exemplary Adoptee Barnstar
		For graduating from download's training program. Best of luck, and happy editing! -download | sign! 21:48, 22 April 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have granted rollback rights to your account; the reason for this is that after a review of some of your contributions, I believe I can trust you to use rollback correctly by using it for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback and Wikipedia:Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Good luck and thanks. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:21, 11 May 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

thanks. that was quick Earlypsychosis (talk) 01:25, 11 May 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm concerned about your usage of rollback here, here, here, here, and here. Which part of these constituted vandalism? Q ^{T C} 08:33, 11 May 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

thought it was blanking - repeated removal of a formatted box for a number of football players. [1]. I guess there is no such thing as good faith rollback. thanks for the message Earlypsychosis (talk) 08:50, 11 May 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Indeed I heard about this subject. However, I believe that socionics is not mature enough to become a science, it still contains a lot of mystical crap (sorry for my French). When various socionic schools begin a war of edits and rollbacks in Wikipedia, I prefer to stay aside. These wars are similar to those related to gayness, Islam and creationism - tedious and non-productive. --Dmitri Lytov (talk) 11:19, 11 May 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for supporting me in my recent RfA, which unfortunately did not pass with a final tally of (45/39/9). I plan on addressing the concerns raised and working to improve in the next several months. Special thanks go to MBisanz, GT5162, and MC10 for nominating me. Thanks again, -download ׀ sign! 03:50, 12 May 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello. I'm part of a research group at the University of Washington. In April, we met with some local Wikipedians to learn what they would like to know about other editors’ history and activities (within Wikipedia) when interacting with them on talk pages. The goal of those sessions was to gather feedback to help design an embedded application that could quickly communicate useful information about other Wikipedians. We have now created a few images that we feel represent some of what our participants thought was important. We would appreciate it if you took a few minutes of your time to complete an online survey that investigates whether or not these images would be useful to you. Your quick contribution would be very valuable to our research group and ultimately to Wikipedia. (When finished, the code for this application will be given over to the Wikipedia community to use and/or adjust as they see fit.)

Willing to spend a few minutes taking our survey? Click this link.

Please feel free to share the link with other Wikipedians. The more feedback, the better! The survey is completely anonymous and takes less than 10 minutes to complete. All data is used for university research purposes only.

Thank you for your time! If you have any questions about our research or research group, please visit our user page. Commprac01 (talk) 00:45, 10 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Additional details about our research group are available here.

See Wikipedia:Talk_page_guidelines#User_talk_pages. The rule seems to be that user talk is your own to mess around with. Sam Vimes 11:33, 14 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You're welcome. If you have any articles you'd like me to check and edit, let me know.--SidP (talk) 20:11, 19 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

And you'd like me to what with it? A little message would be nice. Regards, --—Cyclonenim | Chat  10:08, 29 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done. Hope it's to your satisfaction. Bring 'em on.--SidP (talk) 19:17, 29 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Case management (USA health system), and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: Case management. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally moving or duplicating content, please be sure you have followed the procedure at Wikipedia:Splitting by acknowledging the duplication of material in edit summary to preserve attribution history.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 01:20, 2 July 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

created a Case management (disambiguation) page and moved old content of case management to new page Case management (USA health system) Earlypsychosis (in case you were wondering!) (talk) 01:38, 2 July 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

opps - did a cut and paste but have now got some help to do a proper move!! all sorted (in case you were interested)! Earlypsychosis (talk) 22:50, 2 July 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

on the main page of wp, in the section "did you know...?" is a link to wp's newest pages. from there, another link to newest pages, and you get all the new articles, most of which are almost immediately deleted. anyone can go there and tag articles as either problematic (no refs, nonnotable, vandalism, etc), or as basically OK, and mark as "patrolled" i look there for interresting new articles, and found yours on case management. i am very familiar with this topic, but didnt feel ready to write an article. good start, better than i could have done. if you want to respond this, go ahead and respond here is fine.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 18:52, 2 July 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

you wrote:

this needs extensive copy editing !! Hearing Voices Movement

Agreed! I am not a fan of this article. It's slanted and needs real work on POV. But I did my usual editing activities, although the exorbitant list of references and articles and the formatting was a real bear that I did not complete. --SidP (talk) 00:53, 3 July 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

it is better now! I will keep it on my list of things to do. Earlypsychosis (talk) 03:45, 3 July 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have set up a Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine/Psychiatry task force, and begun a discussion on the talk page for potential benefits. Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:31, 3 July 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Earlypsychosis

I would be very happy for psychiatric formulation to redirect to clinical formulation. Feel free to go ahead and do that. Also: I don't know if it's your line but you're welcome to help out with Child and adolescent psychiatry, which I am working on at the moment.

Regards, --Anonymaus (talk) 04:19, 7 July 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Earlypsychosis. You have new messages at Cosmic Latte's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.

Cosmic Latte (talk) 21:29, 21 July 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, I do agree that the original article needed work. However, I reverted your edits because they did not reflect neutrality. Saying that benzodiazepines are "best avoided" and are "not recommended" are loaded claims. You cite NICE guidelines and offered original research to cite your edit, but your edits cannot reflect a consensus opinion when there is no consensus that benzodiazepines should be avoided for the treatment of panic disorder. For instance, the American Psychiatric Association's Practice Guidelines offers benzodiazepines as first-line treatments along with CBT and antidepressants. APA guidelines

We can make sourced claims such as:

• Benzodiazepines are widely prescribed to treat panic disorder
• They have proven efficacy in the short-term treatment of panic disorder
• Benzodiazepines have a high risk of addiction/tolerance and discontinuation side effects, and many experts agree that they should only be prescribed for the short-term and/or sparingly.
• Because of their long-term risks and risks of addiction/tolerance, the NICE does not recommend their use in the treatment of anxiety disorders.

We cannot make claims that they are "best avoided" and are "not recommended" because these claims are not encyclopedic. Mutual monarch (talk) 23:00, 24 July 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Edit: I recommend asking members from WikiProject Psychology and and Wikiproject: Medicine/Psychiatry about the best approach to this section. Mutual monarch (talk) 23:03, 24 July 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

At present, the page Case management (disambiguation) is a redirect to Case management, which is itself a disambiguation page. I have proposed the former page for deletion in order to avoid multiple redirects. You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((dated prod)) notice. You may want to request a move from Case management to Case management (disambiguation). See Wikipedia:Requested moves. Cnilep (talk) 23:06, 28 July 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Earlypsychosis. You have new messages at Cnilep's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.

It's an abbreviation of "schzophrenia". Put it back if you may please (if you'd like)! Rocknroll714 (talk) 05:57, 3 August 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

never heard of it.. From where? Earlypsychosis (talk) 05:58, 3 August 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It is used informally as shorthand locally in hospitals where I have worked, but I don't think it is official in any way. I'd not be inclined to use in in the article. Casliber (talk · contribs) 09:04, 3 August 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for the note, but you seem to have missed the long convo at Talk:Barack_Obama_citizenship_conspiracy_theories#Other_presidents_who_had_similar_issues. -- 209.6.238.201 (talk) 02:15, 25 August 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm sorry? Hello. Yes, I'm a real person. Please read the above note, and the section it is linked to. I understand your confusion, as a long time IP editor this does happen all the time. I'll just go ahead and revert your change again. No need to continue templating my talk page. -- 209.6.238.201 (talk) 02:21, 25 August 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No problem at all. I'm sure you do a great deal of invaluable work quickly with the help of your scripts. Just try and remember to take a breath once in a while. I wouldn't edit as an IP if I didn't want to be an occasional speedbump. :) -- 209.6.238.201 (talk) 02:30, 25 August 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Although if you'd care to rescind this from my talk page, and replace it with a normal ((welcome-anon)) template (I always use that as my opener when I have to 'plate an IP regardless), I wouldn't mind. It occurs to me that having a note about "vandalizing conspiracy theories" at the tip top makes me look like a total nut. :( -- 209.6.238.201 (talk) 02:36, 25 August 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Much obliged! -- 209.6.238.201 (talk) 02:42, 25 August 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(edit conflict: dang, SignBot needs to breath sometimes too!) Although if you are really bored, you could fix ((welcome-anon)) too, see Template_talk:Welcome-anon#Template_is_broken. Does anyone actually use subst? I mean those of us without scripts just let the bots handle it, and I figure if I'm welcoming someone I might as well welcome them into the knowledge of how templates work at the same time.... -- 209.6.238.201 (talk) 02:41, 25 August 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

See though, how ((welcome-anon)) is broken? The last sentence says on my talk page "ask me on [[User talk:((subst:REVISIONUSER))|my talk page]]" instead of linking to your page. Don't worry your head about it, I'm just going to join the existing complaint. -- 209.6.238.201 (talk) 02:50, 25 August 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

need some evidence for this. Cheers Earlypsychosis (talk) 04:10, 3 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm not sure which article you're referring to, as I made similar edits to several, but I was just reflecting the list at BDNF#Disease_linkage, which does appear to have a reference. If this claim is not supported by the reference, feel free to change or remove it as needed. Thanks for your close attention to sourcing. -- Beland (talk) 04:51, 3 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I read the source and their is no mention of schizophrenia in the article at all. I have removed the paragraph. Earlypsychosis (talk) 05:48, 3 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please use the "citation needed" tag before removing unreferenced content.--Nutriveg (talk) 18:06, 3 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A quick search of PubMed provided some relevant citations. Boghog (talk) 18:16, 3 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

have responded to this on another page. Earlypsychosis (talk) 23:16, 3 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In his first page move,the user is just trying to rename his account....He might be thinking that moving his user page could change his user name.I think he must address this problem to some bureaucrats of Wikipedia.. arunkumar^{checkmate me} 09:53, 23 November 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

But on to his second and third page moves, it just looks suspicious.Why is he moving User talk:Omoak Fendia page to some other name???Does this user know Omoak Fendia personally (or doing some personal request) or is it the users alternate account??Should look into that... arunkumar^{checkmate me} 09:58, 23 November 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

for all the edits you do a kitten:

andyzweb (talk) has given you a kitten! Kittens promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Kittens must be fed three times a day and will be your faithful companion forever! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a kitten, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Spread the goodness of kittens by adding ((subst:Kitten)) to someone's talk page with a friendly message!

andyzweb (talk) 04:15, 31 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Do you really want help organizing your user page :-) ?? MaenK.A._Talk 09:52, 24 March 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

go for it Earlypsychosis (talk) 09:53, 24 March 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As requested, I reviewed and edited the Rufus May article. I would like to see a little more information about him, both personal details and work experience vs. criticism. --SidP (talk) 19:46, 24 March 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The ref you added states "CBT is a promising but under evaluated intervention. Currently, trial-based data supporting the wide use of CBT for people with schizophrenia or other psychotic illnesses are far from conclusive. More trials are justified, especially in comparison with a lower grade supportive approach. These trials should be designed to be both clinically meaningful and widely applicable." yet you have summarized it as "CBT is now considered a recommended treatment for schizophrenia". I am not sure how this can be justified... Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:55, 4 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Since this was first created in 2005, and later re-created (probably mistakenly) by me in 2010, it can not be speedily deleted. We can merge the material within the next few days, without objection; then it can be a redirect and as an admin, I can lock any further move. Bearian (talk) 15:56, 4 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I merged the two articles into prodrome. What about the other related articles? Bearian (talk) 18:36, 4 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Earlypsychosis. You have new messages at FiachraByrne's talk page.
Message added FiachraByrne (talk) 23:57, 19 August 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.Reply[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:57, 24 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]