Jump to content

Talk:Repressed memory

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wiki Education assignment: Human Cognition SP23

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 20 January 2023 and 15 May 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Smithzorah (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Smithzorah (talk) 21:32, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Article highly biased and non-neutral in opposition to the "repressed memory" phenomenon

[edit]

This article is totally biased and probably violates Wikipedia non-bias policy. Suggest for deletion or integral rewriting. 151.28.184.194 (talk) 11:22, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia does not have a 'non-bias policy', see WP:YESBIAS. MrOllie (talk) 11:56, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It does have a "neutral point of view" policy, which is what I am referring to.
And this article is very apparently non-compliant with the neutral point of view policy, as is evident from simply reading it. Instead of simply relating about the sides of the scientific debate, it is evident in favoring one of them. 151.28.184.194 (talk) 14:16, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do click in the link above. NPOV means that Wikipedia follows the cited sources. When they are critical, so too will be the Wikipedia article. We don't do WP:FALSEBALANCE. MrOllie (talk) 03:04, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article currently equates dissociative amnesia with repression, which is misleading. According to the APA and WHO, dissociative amnesia is a well-validated phenomenon, and it is recognized as a factor in the diagnosis of PTSD in the DSM. The article appears to give undue weight to the opinion of McNally, rather than reflecting the consensus of leading mental health authorities. This approach compromises the neutrality of the article and risks spreading medical misinformation. The article should be revised to align with reliable sources and established medical guidelines. 2600:8800:601C:AF00:BD40:57BC:2982:6AB9 (talk) 01:05, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Beneath your hyperbolic prose you might have a point. If so, I encourage you to learn how to edit Wikipedia articles and then add information regarding different perspectives.
Yes, learning how to edit Wikipedia requires time and devoted study. If your response is "I don't have time" then you will need to accept the current state of the article as written by many busy professionals who have taken the time to learn how to edit. Frenzied comments on this talk page will accomplish nothing. Mark D Worthen PsyD (talk) [he/him] 15:23, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your response. I believe there may have been a misinterpretation of the intent of my comment. My goal was to provide factual support for the original commentator's concerns. I'm not sure what was construed as 'hyperbolic' or 'frenzied', and I do not find those general characterizations constructive.
I appreciate your encouragement to engage with editing, and I'll give it a try. 2600:8800:601C:AF00:E1CB:3722:2B04:E536 (talk) 01:41, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]