User talk:Indrek Alberg

Welcome!

Hello, Indrek Alberg, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!

August 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Bridging Eastern & Western Psychiatry may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 06:26, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Leonetto Amadei

Hi Indrek. I have reverted your latest additions to Leonetto Amadei. To me it sounds both as WP:OS and WP:COATRACK. Can you help me understand the direction in which you want to take this biography? Best, Sam Sailor ^Sing 07:45, 1 September 2013 (UTC) In my opinion it is noteworthy what now it is actual and it is still topic for the debate. So I should like to stress that today the name of Leonetto Amadei is particularly linked to the decision about plagio (in Latin plagium). Also the participation of the President Amadei at a conference about this controversial point showes his temperament. The comment of Langone is of a scholar of USA, very important in this field of research.[reply]

September 2013

Hello, Indrek Alberg. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject. I

have no conflict of interest. I am an Estonian student in law, interested in psychological topics.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. IRWolfie- (talk) 10:34, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Leonetto Amadei may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Langone]]in Cultic Studies Journal (1,126 -129 IX) of [[International Cultic Studies Association]]],innthis debate was discussed the whole range of phenomena associated with mental manipulation

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 15:56, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indrek Alberg, you are invited to the Teahouse

Hi Indrek Alberg! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Hajatvrc (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 01:18, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pornophilia

There is only one article about "pornophilia" indexed by PubMed, and it is from 1971. This means that the term gained no support from the scientific community and therefore it should not be employed in Wikipedia articles. Please read WP:MEDRS and WP:MEDASSESS for more information. Tgeorgescu (talk) 12:08, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I would recommend reading WP:VER and WP:OR, especially WP:SYNTH since it seems that you have produced an original synthesis of the sources you have quoted or otherwise produced information which is not supported by any source. Tgeorgescu (talk) 23:17, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]