Talk:Borderline personality disorder

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Borderline personality disorder article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9: 90 days

Borderline personality disorder was one of the Social sciences and society good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
October 17, 2006	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
September 24, 2007	Good article nominee	Listed
July 5, 2008	Good article reassessment	Delisted

Current status: Delisted good article

Psychology C‑class High‑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
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Medicine C‑class High‑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
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Archive 4	Archive 5	Archive 6
Archive 7	Archive 8	Archive 9

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 4 sections are present.

The Big Hit?

If anyone agrees, I would like to add "The Big Hit" to the list of movies, which are "attempting to depict characters with the disorder", due to its main character. 83.17.84.82 (talk) 08:25, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Marilyn Monroe=

according to this [3] article, Marlyn had it. Kittybrewster ☎ 16:43, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That article is a dead link. There are a number of celebrities that show signs of personality disorder. However, wikipedia is not the place for such gossip. Reub2000 (talk) 03:43, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Archiving

Since this talk page is so long, I'm turning on auto-archiving, so messages older than 90 days will be moved to the archive sub-pages. This will make it easier to follow discussions. Let me know if there are any objections. Qwyrxian (talk) 13:10, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Where are those? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.4.19.137 (talk) 05:13, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for noticing; it wasn't showing up properly because the older, manual archives made in 2006 & 2007 were not named the same way that we currently name archives. I've moved the old pages to conform to the current naming scheme. There's now a box in the upper right, just below the Wikiproject info and to the right of the To Do list, that has all of the archives listed. For some reason, there is no Archive 3, but I don't believe any old information is missing. Qwyrxian (talk) 05:43, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Misuse of term

When referring to Star Wars, you use the term hexology. The correct term for a series consisting of six is hexalogy 76.179.134.194 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:33, 2 June 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Edit request from Gyulafekete, 18 June 2011

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

The section:

Borderline personality disorder was once classified as a subset of schizophrenia (describing patients with borderline schizophrenic tendencies). Today BPD is used more generally to describe individuals who display emotional dysregulation and instability, with paranoid schizophrenic ideation or delusions being only one criterion (criterion #9) of a total of 9 criteria, of which 5, or more, must be present for this diagnosis.

Should read:

Borderline personality disorder was once classified as a subset of schizophrenia (describing patients with borderline schizophrenic tendencies). Today BPD is used more generally to describe individuals who display emotional dysregulation and instability, with paranoid ideation or delusions being only one criterion (criterion #9) of a total of 9 criteria, of which 5, or more, must be present for this diagnosis.

i.e. the word Schizophrenic should not be present. Paranoid ideation is the correct term. Paranoid schizophrenic already implies the person has schizophrenia. This may cause alarm and confusion swell as being incorrect. Gyulafekete (talk) 15:37, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done Seems straight-forward enough. ^Avic_ennasis @ 17:45, 16 Sivan 5771 / 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Semi-protection?

It says that this article was semi-protected sometime last October because of excessive vandalism, but I didn't see anything in the talk archive. Looking at the entries above, it looks like the newbies have many constructive edits to add. Is this really justified? Reub2000 (talk) 03:47, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're always welcome to request removing semi-protection. :-) The best place would either be the protecting admin's talk page or at WP:RUP. ^Avic_ennasis @ 07:41, 17 Sivan 5771 / 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Okay, we can give it a trial - a lot of medical articles seem to erode or amass material at a fairly steady rate - not a problem over a week or two but can be a headache to monitor over months to years. We can see how it goes. Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:51, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm a (relative) newbie who will likely come and go on Wikipedia occasionally. I did some edits on this article in the section that was titled, "Mediators and Moderators," which was tagged for being overly technical and hard for a nonspecialist reader to understand. While I'm not the author of the original section and hope the author reviews my edits, I hope I have made a step in the direction of a clearer section that's relevant to the article topic. I didn't know the article was semi-protected and am not even sure what that means, but hope someone will let me know if they have any concerns about my edits, thanks. Grebe39 (talk) 03:34, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I like it. I just made some minor changes--section titles only get caps on the first word (unless there's a proper noun); we don't include the years of the article publishing in the text like journal articles do; and refs are usually, though not always, better at the end of sentences. Semi-protection means that only editors who have a registered account (i.e., not editing as an anonymous IP) and have been editing for at least 4 days and 10 edits can edit the article. You've already passed that threshold, which is why you were able to edit the article. It's used mainly to stop vandalism from anonymous editors. I felt your version was such an improvement that you've fixed the problem that the template mentioned, so I removed it. Thanks! Qwyrxian (talk) 12:06, 31 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]