User talk:Expsychobabbler

If you've come here to complain that I reverted your links, please make a selection at
TastyPoutine's Spammer Bingo first. (Thanks, Tasty)

Welcome to my talk page. Feel free to leave me a message to discuss my actions or tell me about something that you think I might want to know. Please add your message at the bottom, and sign and date it by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end.

I prefer to keep conversations intact, so if you ask me a question here, I will reply here, unless you indicate otherwise.
If I left you a message on your talk page, I have added you to my watchlist, so if you reply there, I will see your response.

Thanks!

Just wanted to drop a quick note to thank you for your diligent and thoughtful work on the domestic violence article to bring it more closely into alignment with NPOV - 96.25.84.50 (talk) 01:22, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the thanks. It is nice to have ones efforts appreciated. I do what I can in the face of sources based on some very dodgy use of statitics.--Expsychobabbler (talk) 10:51, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Braikers Book

Have patience. I am working on a new "psychological manipulation" article which will cover various aspects of Braikers book including those mentioned in "psychological abuse". I have also put in links from "psychological abuse" and "cycle of abuse" to the new "psychological manipulation" article. As i said I own Braikers book and she does not mention the word "abuse" once.--Penbat (talk) 09:20, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Penbat.

I look forward to the manipulation article. It seems commonsense that manipulation is usually abusive and usually a large component of psycological abuse. Whether the word is actually used seems like semantics. I too own the book and consider it very useful and relevant to people who may read that page while looking for answers to their plight.--Expsychobabbler (talk) 12:14, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The psychological manipulation article is up now. I dont claim it is perfect. I have also referenced a good book by George Simon. The point is, yes, manipulation is an important component of abuse and i have a link back to Psychological abuse. But also psychological manipulation applies to many other things like advertising, political spin and propoganda etc - few would consider these to be abuse. --Penbat (talk) 16:37, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also it is possible to manipulate somebody without any obvious resultant abuse. --Penbat (talk) 16:54, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A manipulator can manipulate somebody to act in a way which is in that person's best interests not the manipulators. --Penbat (talk) 17:18, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How to proceed

The last thing the encyclopedia needs is you getting blocked over edit-warring with a bunch of POV pushers working in tandem. The best thing to do is wait for neutral editors. But since the community is extremely apathetic when it comes to gender related articles, that can take some time. In the meantime, stay calm and keep a record including difs of anything that is evidence of WP:DE and POV editing, such as non-neutral phrasing and repeated, unexplained removal of reliable sources [1], and reverting edits with some nonsense about men's rights activism [2] etc. If the behavior persists and if it threatens to harm other articles (notice that one editor systematically edits articles about domestic violence), there are venues to deal with that. --Sonicyouth86 (talk) 21:03, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good advice I am sure. Thanks.--Expsychobabbler (talk) 10:55, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 14:01, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 14:06, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]