User talk:Biosthmors

Proposed deletion of Lifestyle and Mental Health

The article Lifestyle and Mental Health has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

There are lots of articles that are cited 1000 times (or more). Generally, those are just mentions, only rarely is there a discussion of those articles. Does not meet WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Randykitty (talk) 22:00, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello Randykitty, I was thinking you were right after looking only at PubMed indexed literature, but after a Google Books search, I made some improvements to the article and removed the template with an explanatory diff. Thank you. Biosthmors (talk) 17:14, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

I'll wait a moment until the article is converted to an article covering the topic, using the Walsh article as a source, rather than an article about the Walsh review. If it's not going to be converted, I'll take this to WP:AFD. There's thousands of articles like this review, cited thousands of times and discussed in other articles: that's how science advances, by discussing each others work and ideas. Only rarely is a journal article important enough to justify a WP entry. This is not one of them. --Randykitty (talk) 11:36, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Randykitty, I have converted the article. Any current thoughts relating to WP:AFD? Also, while attempting to wp:build the web, I found Therapeutic Lifestyle Change (depression treatment), which I find concerning because that article is written as if it is supposed to be branded to one academic instead of a generalized concept. The topic of therapeutic lifestyle changes is a big part of Walsh's 2011 review, but the Therapeutic Lifestyle Change (depression treatment) article is written as if it is branded to one academic. Meanwhile, Walsh doesn't even cite Ilardi. I tagged the article with {{unbalanced}}. In fact, it strikes me as more of an advertisement as currently written. Thoughts? Biosthmors (talk) 14:21, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Yes, that article is indeed unbalanced and somewhat promotional. I'd see it as a start, to be merged with Lifestyle and Mental Health (LaMH). "Lifestyle and mental health" would probably the best title for such an article, with the "therapeutic" article condensed into one section. As it stands, the LaMH article still is about the Wash article. While it probably is a valuable source, it doesn't merit its own article, IMHO. --Randykitty (talk) 15:16, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Well here I mention that "Mental_health#Prevention_and_promotion seems to be the currently existing landing point for the topic we could call lifestyle and mental health. I speculate that that section is ripe for improvement and that another separate article on the topic isn't needed." The editor there appeared to agree. As someone who has improved and maintained a disease article for about a decade to WP:MEDRS sourcing requirements, I'm kind of thrilled at the idea of an article about an article giving a snapshot in time of medical / scientific / psychological thought. Similarly, I detest all the "Management of Z" articles (where "Z" = a disease) around here. Given the abstracts of [1] and [2], Randykitty, wouldn't you think an article on Lifestyle and Mental Health meets WP:GNG, similar to how books become notable through independent reviews? Personally, I think there should be a lot more articles about "articles" (books, clinical trials, articles, etc.) on this project, of course conforming to WP:GNG. Biosthmors (talk) 19:43, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

• No. Empathically. --Randykitty (talk) 22:04, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Lifestyle and Mental Health

Hello, Biosthmors. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Lifestyle and Mental Health, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 05:06, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Lifestyle and Mental Health

Hello, Biosthmors. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Lifestyle and Mental Health".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:53, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello Liz. I am curious about proceeding. I worked on a draft at User:Biosthmors/Lifestyle and Mental Health instead of in draftspace. I am considering just being bold and putting this article back at Lifestyle and Mental Health. Or is that not possible as it was draftified? Is there an advantage to requesting Draft:Lifestyle and Mental Health be undeleted so I can update it? In general, do you have any advice on what would give my creation the best chance to stick around in mainspace? Thank you. Biosthmors (talk) 20:44, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in a research

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:26, 23 October 2024 (UTC)