Talk:Major depressive disorder
Diagnostic How to's...
I removed the subpages from the Talk page...redundant.
I also deleted the Questionnaire section. One, it's POV, as it is only one way to diagnose depression, and 2, providing a how to on an information page is a slippery slope, even if it's only a small part of the entire eval. Blessings... --Michael J. Formica 06:56, 12 November 2007 (CST)
- subpages are cool :) Aleksander Stos 03:56, 19 November 2007 (CST)
I think we should be very careful about deleting content. 1) The PHQ2 session was well referenced and does not seem POV. If you feel there are other dx strategies, please add them rather than delete well-referenced content. I did tone down its wording as it had a simplistic, how-to approach. You could have done that rather than deleting the text. 2) Ouch, I see now that the PHQ9 content was not at all referenced and even worse 'how-to'. I have restored and fixed that. - Robert Badgett 02:32, 19 December 2007 (CST)
- Agreed. Robert, I had intended to move the content I inadvertently deleted to a sandbox page, and screwed up the process. Thanks for picking up on that and putting it back. --Michael J. Formica 08:00, 19 December 2007 (CST)
The alert to the DSM-IV copyright DSMCR is a very helpful explanation but seems more obtrusive than needed. Consider:
- changing 'unauthorized reproduction of diagnostic criteria' to 'unauthorized reproduction of their diagnostic criteria'
- removing the horizontal line and instead do something like indenting the text or preceding the text with 'Note:'
- Consider removing ', with pertinent elements in italics' as the text that followed the template did not have any text in italics.
- Robert Badgett 02:32, 19 December 2007 (CST)
- Agreed to all. I couldn't think of how to do this without it being cumbersome. I actually wanted to put it into a small info box (Hah!), but my template skills are not up to par with that.
- Further, I don't feel any particular ownership over templates that I create, so, if you see a faster pussycat, better mousetrap, etc., have at it! --Michael J. Formica 08:04, 19 December 2007 (CST)
This article seems to be lacking a definition and high-level discussion, which would go in an introductory section. --Larry Sanger 11:06, 19 December 2007 (CST)
- Got it. Mine. --Michael J. Formica 16:33, 19 December 2007 (CST)