User talk:Djenkins10

Hey there! :) Vmathews102 (talk) 19:50, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

About your choices...

Article 1: Gestalt Therapy <-- this article looks like it's had a lot of work put in on it already, but if you look at the Talk page, you can see areas where people think it needs improvement. For example, the last talk comment is about how the reader still wasn't sure what actually happens at Gestalt therapy.

Article 2: Stress Management <-- this one looks like it's had a lot of work done on it recently. Again, check out the talk page to see areas where people think it could be improved. One thing I noticed was a comment about mindfulness therapy from '07. That's one area I think could be added to the page now, because there has been a lot of research done on it since '07.

Article 3: Anxiety Disorder <-- based on the talk page, there's a lot of controversial things in this article, so unless you're ready to have a lot of wikipedians critiquing your work, and potentially do battle with some folks, I'd suggest steering clear.

ScottPKingPhD (talk) 14:12, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Editing your page.

Hi Destiny!

I love your article! It very concise and to the point though out the article;you used reliable sources, the structure is clear. The only suggestions I have for you are:

in the last paragraph of the last section to maybe break apart that section into 2 different sections. I think that the studies need their own section.
you have the positives of MBSR, what are the negatives? are there any if not then say so somewhere -> this will make the article balanced and neutral in coverage.

I hope this helps. 3faith.hope.love (talk) 19:37, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review

Hi!

I’m a little skeptical of this: “The benefits of using a mindfulness-based program have been proven to be effect regardless of type of program or length.” I don’t think anything is 100% effective.

One thing that happens a lot in the article is, “In this article, called X, researchers did Y and found Z.” This is an example of a primary source, which you should avoid using if possible. Meta-reviews are great, and you should try to use them as much as you can.

You could also go into some of the activities of a typical session of MBSR.

Cognitive behavioral therapy might be a good model article.

Ashley Suk (talk) 14:23, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the positive input. It was a bit difficult finding sources and the source I ended up working with was given to me by the one lady that edited part of my work, since she said it was a good secondary source. But my goal was to at least make my contribution to help others. Wmiguel08 (talk) 17:23, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Help us improve the Wikipedia Education Program

Hi Djenkins10! As a student editor on Wikipedia, you have a lot of valuable experience about what it's like to edit as a part of a classroom assignment. In order to help other students like you enjoy editing while contributing positively to Wikipedia, it's extremely helpful to hear from real student editors about their challenges, successes, and support needs. Please take a few minutes to answer these questions by clicking below. (Note that the responses are posted to a public wiki page.) Thanks!

Delivered on behalf of User:Sage Ross (WMF), 17:13, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]