User contributions for Reconsolidation
A user with 263 edits. Account created on 25 November 2012.
12 December 2014
- 13:0813:08, 12 December 2014 diff hist −96 User:Reconsolidation Undid revision 530874602 by Reconsolidation (talk) current
14 September 2013
- 12:4912:49, 14 September 2013 diff hist +242 Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming →American English spellings: NLP was born in American so unless there is a strong case to use UK-English then we should default to US-English.
21 July 2013
- 12:1312:13, 21 July 2013 diff hist +191 Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming →Re: claim of overgeneralisation in lead reagrding Norcross et al (2010): Does Glasner-Edwards and Rawson (2010) cite Norcross' study?
15 July 2013
- 14:5014:50, 15 July 2013 diff hist +286 Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming →Section Early development: We know for certain that nobody is "left brained" or "right brained"
- 01:5801:58, 15 July 2013 diff hist +578 Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming →Section Early development: Another view
14 July 2013
- 11:3911:39, 14 July 2013 diff hist +505 Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming →Section Early development: Writing for the opponent
- 02:3102:31, 14 July 2013 diff hist −41 m NLP →Organizations: redundant
- 02:3002:30, 14 July 2013 diff hist +79 NLP a process for solving an optimization problem in mathematics
10 July 2013
- 22:5122:51, 10 July 2013 diff hist +683 Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming →Misleading lead: Daubert v. Merrell-Dow Pharmaceuticals
- 13:1913:19, 10 July 2013 diff hist +504 Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming →Reversion over lack of consensus: Read WP:BRD again
- 12:3212:32, 10 July 2013 diff hist +479 Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming →Misleading lead: Norcross et al. state "treatments were consensually designated as probably discredited (mean rating of 4.0 or greater) - can we all agree on this? its between possibly and probably.
9 July 2013
- 23:4523:45, 9 July 2013 diff hist +482 Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming →Reversion over lack of consensus: Consensus is not determined by counting heads
- 13:5913:59, 9 July 2013 diff hist +223 Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming →Reversion over lack of consensus: It was organised by the course convener and advanced psychology students choose their own topic.
- 09:3109:31, 9 July 2013 diff hist +74 Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming →Reversion over lack of consensus: It is one of the top research-based psychology universities in the world.
- 05:5705:57, 9 July 2013 diff hist +373 Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming →Reversion over lack of consensus: We might be able to get some more editors through my university.
8 July 2013
- 23:3023:30, 8 July 2013 diff hist +398 Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming →Reversion over lack of consensus: Interested to see if others can come up with better versions.
- 22:5822:58, 8 July 2013 diff hist +49 Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming →Reversion over lack of consensus: Of my two suggestions: which one is better and why?
- 22:5722:57, 8 July 2013 diff hist +352 Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming →Reversion over lack of consensus: Which on is better and why?
- 22:2222:22, 8 July 2013 diff hist +332 User talk:Lam Kin Keung →discuss revert: new section
- 10:5410:54, 8 July 2013 diff hist +456 Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming →Misleading lead: I offer this shorter, more concise option
- 10:4710:47, 8 July 2013 diff hist −103 Neuro-linguistic programming how about this - making it more concise
- 07:1207:12, 8 July 2013 diff hist +477 Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming →Misleading lead: another option for lead
- 06:5806:58, 8 July 2013 diff hist +393 Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming →Misleading lead: it could be as simple as changing "certainly discredited" to "certainly discredited for addiction treatment".
- 06:1806:18, 8 July 2013 diff hist +586 Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming Really, this change should be uncontroversial
- 05:2105:21, 8 July 2013 diff hist +378 Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming →Misleading lead: correction to lead, certainly discredited for addiction treatment
- 05:1605:16, 8 July 2013 diff hist +19 Neuro-linguistic programming the sources refers to NLP for drug and alcohol addictions
7 July 2013
- 12:3012:30, 7 July 2013 diff hist +1,244 Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming →Misleading lead: Please let me know exactly what points you disagree with and why so we can establish consensus.
6 July 2013
- 23:4323:43, 6 July 2013 diff hist +198 Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming →Misleading lead: are you commenting as an outside observer?
- 23:0023:00, 6 July 2013 diff hist +146 Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming →Misleading lead: Are we justified in reporting it like this?
- 22:5022:50, 6 July 2013 diff hist +416 Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming →Misleading lead: Norcross does not round up
- 09:3609:36, 6 July 2013 diff hist +1,888 Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming →Misleading lead: Let's work together on improving this.
- 02:2702:27, 6 July 2013 diff hist +1,343 Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming →Misleading lead: I think Norcross' response might answer you query
5 July 2013
- 05:2805:28, 5 July 2013 diff hist +9 m Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming →Misleading lead: average rating of 3.8
- 05:2005:20, 5 July 2013 diff hist +548 Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming →Misleading lead: We (as wikipedians) are making post-hoc interpretation of what 3.57 and 3.87 means, i.e. between possible and probably discredited.
- 04:3804:38, 5 July 2013 diff hist +240 Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming →Misleading lead: Which data set are you referring to?
- 00:0600:06, 5 July 2013 diff hist +484 Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming →Misleading lead: scientific consensus that NLP is certainly discredited for the treatment of drug and alcohol dependence, it does not follow that NLP is certainty discredited for mental/behavioural disorders
4 July 2013
- 04:3804:38, 4 July 2013 diff hist +220 Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming →Misleading lead: Wasn't the top ten list for certainly discredited drug and alcohol addictions?
- 01:2101:21, 4 July 2013 diff hist +1 Neuro-linguistic programming correct URL
- 01:1401:14, 4 July 2013 diff hist −2 m Neuro-linguistic programming →Early development: ref
- 01:1201:12, 4 July 2013 diff hist −216 m Neuro-linguistic programming →Early development: sp and refs
- 00:4900:49, 4 July 2013 diff hist +10 m Neuro-linguistic programming →Scientific criticism: gmr, sp
- 00:4400:44, 4 July 2013 diff hist +140 Neuro-linguistic programming missing refs for Witkowski
- 00:3300:33, 4 July 2013 diff hist +553 Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming →Misleading lead: sounds less like "pseudoskeptical debunking"
3 July 2013
- 23:0723:07, 3 July 2013 diff hist +412 Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming →Misleading lead: What is your interpretation of data?
- 13:4613:46, 3 July 2013 diff hist +679 Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming →Misleading lead: Can you make this any more concise while maintaining the distinction?
- 08:2308:23, 3 July 2013 diff hist +281 Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming →Misleading lead: I've brought this up before
- 08:0808:08, 3 July 2013 diff hist +2,297 Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming →Misleading lead: new section
- 07:1607:16, 3 July 2013 diff hist +590 m Neuro-linguistic programming →Empirical validity: quote Fassinger
- 07:1107:11, 3 July 2013 diff hist −391 Neuro-linguistic programming merge refs
- 07:0507:05, 3 July 2013 diff hist +216 Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming →Levelt: new section
