Talk:Adrenaline junkie

Should we include references in the article to politics, debate in general, political debate, and in general rantings and other forms of intentional direct confrontation as outlets of adrenaline addiction ?

I have no references to substantiate, but it is my impression that they are. --listenin

-An adrenaline junkie is someone who is almost addicted to adrenaline sounds negative but being an adrenaline junkie has its pros and cons. -A pro is that the limits of the sport expands because the athlete tries newer and more exciting tricks -A con is that the athlete proposes danger towards his or herself because they’re trying very new things.

The second half needs to be cleaned up alot.

did some stuff

Hi there, folks. I did a bunch of work on this; the language ("some guy on one of those Believe-it-or-not shows"?!) and formatting looked like it could use some cleaning up. I also added some supplemental information about addiction and neurochemistry.

This is my first Wikipedia edit besides minor spelling and punctuation revisions here and there; please be gentle with me but brutal with revisions. I want a second pair of eyes to proofread. I'm especially looking for people to help me with stylistic issues like peacock and weasel terms.

(by the way, I didn't think about creating a username before I wrote the article, so my edition is only identified by my IP addy, but I really did write it! ^_^)

Um, how come I can get the damn 'contents' box to activate? Its driving me nuts! Makes me want to go join an army ;) 83.71.104.139 22:31, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Me again, I deleted the section about people joining the army, it's an insightful point but i think could be better made, I hope to rephrase and reinstate fairly soon. Other than that, an espically since the addition of the 'true addiction?' section, maybe the Cleanup tag could be removed? 83.71.104.139 22:59, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]