This article is within the scope of the Occupations WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of occupations. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can see a list of open tasks.
Fellow wikipedians: I hope that I have de-stubified this page. I would love to add a list of links to the top journals in occupational medicine. Anyone want to help? I'd also like to cross-link with some history of the field, including perhaps cross references to Dr. Selikoff, etc., etc. Thanks so much for all your consideration!
Gofigure41 17:27, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
Great work! I've removed the stub indication. If I have time I'll look into the history. JHSnl (talk) 09:07, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
Mrm7171. How are I/O psychology and job satisfaction related to occupational medicine? I/O psychologists do not treat diseases, and job satisfaction is not something treated by OMs? Should there be a link to I/O psychology on every single article that has anything to do with the workplace, even if it has nothing to do with psychology? Why would you suggest someone interested in medicine go to the job satisfaction page? This is likely to just confuse people.Psyc12 (talk) 21:24, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
I just re-included 3 article links: 1. occupational health psychology 2. occupational psychology 3. job satisfaction. I really don't see why you are so opposed? Occupational psychology, throughout Europe especially, seems quite relevant to occupational medicine? Wikipedia is a 'worldwide' encyclopedia. By the way, I also edit a very large number, and wide array of different article topics psyc12. Most articles I edit, I don't add any 'see also' links to. However in this case they all seem warranted? And fit the policy? I just don't see why you deleted them?
You asked about job satisfaction's relevance? This article, as just one example, published in the 'Journal of Occupational Medicine' (2003) titled: Reliability and validity of instruments measuring job satisfaction—a systematic review, seems pretty relevant to me?
Just looking now at your recent edit history, you also seem to have had this same discussion with other editors too? I thought administrator Randykitty had recently explained the 'see also' policy to you very competently?  and  and again the same issue here, on this article too? ?Mrm7171 (talk) 23:51, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
I can sort of see a link to OHP, I/O is a big stretch, and job satisfaction is ridiculous. The fact that someone published an article on job satisfaction in a OM journal doesn't mean anything. You can find all sorts of odd articles in journals. I know a cognitive psychologist who published a paper using quantum equations to explain memory. Should we add cognitive psychology to the article on quantum physics based on the one article? And I am sick of your condescending attitude that everyone is biased but you. Stick to the topic at hand and stop with the accusations and personal comments. Psyc12 (talk) 02:00, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
Calm down please psyc12. Don't personally attack me either simply because I pointed out this exact same issue you had with admin Randykitty recently, see and  and again the same issue here, on this article too? . I just said we need to try and represent professions as they are practiced worldwide, not just in one geographical region. I also do not believe there is such 'clear cut' delineation within professions in many countries, as you keep saying there is in the USA? and we just need to try and represent that in articles. No big deal.Mrm7171 (talk) 02:49, 3 May 2014 (UTC)