||A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject. (Learn how and when to remove this template message)|
|Loren Pankratz was nominated as a Social sciences and society good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.
Review: January 24, 2013.
|This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to . If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.|
|WikiProject Biography / Science and Academia||(Rated C-class)|
|WikiProject Oregon||(Rated C-class, Low-importance)|
New Page Launched
Welcome to Wikipedia Loren Pankratz. This page has long deserved to be written as you will be able to see from the citations I include. It is possible that I might have some bias as I had to ask Pankratz for him to upload some of these pictures. Plus I had to visit the Skeptic's Toolbox, August 2012 in order to get the last of the citations, pictures and interviews. I hereby release this page for all readers to read and enjoy.Sgerbic (talk) 00:51, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Loren Pankratz/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
This is an interesting guy, I'm glad this review gave me the opportunity to find out about him. Unfortunately I'm going to fail the article. My main concern is the organization, I'll go into more detail below.
- The article needs a major rewrite for organization. Some of the sections look like facts have been added in piecemeal, jumbled together. They don't flow. e.g. the Personal section has four short paragraphs that cover education, wife, library, and organ donor card. This doesn't seem to have any rhyme or reason.
- The paragraph beginning "a reviewer for the American Journal of Psychiatry, Pankratz vetted potential publications on Posttraumatic Stress Disorder" is problematic because it seems to be making Pankratz's case for him, rather than explaining his point of view. e.g. "Moreover, both children and adults, it turns out, are amazingly resilient in the long run to trauma."
- This tag needs to be addressed: "In an undoubtedly[who?] unique position for a psychologist, Pankratz was appointed chair of the promotion and tenure committee of the department of psychiatry."
- It's not clear why there's a section called "Selected publications". Who is selecting them? Why are they being selected? It would make sense if these were his most famous, influential, or otherwise notable publications, according to some metric. It seems like they're just being selected at random.
- This is unclear: "Pankratz showed that forced-choice testing was a new strategy for the assessment of malingering related to any sensory deficit. These papers and the one on memory testing have all been cited over 100 times." What papers are these? What source says they have been cited over 100 times? Surely 21 and 22 don't?
- When you introduce a topic that's unfamiliar to a lay reader, like forced-choice testing, explain in line what it is. Assume your reader has no special knowledge of the topic.
- The lead mentions things not in the rest of the article, e.g. the long list of topics he's written about. This means that these facts are uncited.
- Also, there is content in the article not summarized in the lead.
Thanks for the work on the article so far, it was a pleasure to read. Let me know if I can be of any help in improving this article or others, or if I can offer any explanation or clarification. delldot ∇. 06:17, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you Delldot. Great suggestions. As much as I would like to see this page become a GA I don't know if I have the time to devote to all of these changes. I'll see what I can do though as I'm sure that any of these changes will improve the article and make me become a better editor. Sgerbic (talk) 17:27, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks Sgerbic, I'm glad you're interested in still working on it, I'm willing to help however I can. I saw that it was nominated by someone who had only made two minor edits to it, so I did this review with that in mind. But I'm glad you're still active with it. I didn't mean to sound like this wasn't a great contribution on your part, it's certainly a quality piece. So at some point if you want to address these and renominate I'd help however you need. delldot ∇. 22:02, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
File:Loren Pankratz 2011.jpg to appear as POTD
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Loren Pankratz 2011.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on February 27, 2015. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2015-02-27. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. Thanks! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:52, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
I see the article failed GA several years ago for issues still present in the article. The article  was replete with uncited text, text cited to self, text not verified by sources, unattributed opinions and puffery. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 06:54, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
In 1970, Pankratz signed an organ donor card that is now held in the historical archives of the OHSU library.
his work pioneered attention to what is now recognized as a serious health problem. His article was the first to define "drug seeking behavior" and recommend management strategies. This kind of claim can't be sourced to his paper-- needs a secondary, independent source.