Talk:Emotions Anonymous

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Peer review Emotions Anonymous has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.
Spirituality Portal
This article is supported by WikiProject Spirituality.

This project provides a central approach to spirituality-related subjects on Wikipedia.
Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

Contents

[edit] Other Languages

[edit] Portuguese

  • Neurotics Anonymous -> Neuróticos Anônimos
  • Emotions Anonymous -> Emocionais Anônimos
The above is the Brazilian spelling. The European spelling is:
  • Neurotics Anonymous -> Neuróticos Anónimos
  • Emotions Anonymous -> Emocionais Anónimos
Jayme 11:18, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Neurotics Anonymous Information in English

[edit] N/A -> NAIL

I originally decided to use N/A rather than NAIL as the abbreviation for Neurotics Anonymous, because it was shorter and the abbreviation NAIL was originally derived from Neurotics Anonymous International Liaison, though it later became an abbreviation for the organization as a whole, not just the International Service Center (I'm not sure if there's an office that currently functions in that capacity for Neurotics Anonymous now, anyway). But I'm starting to think NAIL is a little bit better now. For a few reasons: (1) N/A is most commonly associated (in English, at least) with Not Applicable, Not Available, and No Answer; (2) Saying N/A out loud requires three syllables (N-slash-A) where as NAIL only requires one. So, I'm going to change the abbreviation used in the test of the article. If anyone can come up with a better argument for using N/A or not using NAIL, we should discuss it. — Craigtalbert 00:19, 8 July 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Problems With 12 Step Program Studies and Assesments

For many years the biggest problem with studies of 12 Step programs has been that these studies include people who have even been to s single or have only been to just a few meetings.

These studies rarely zero-in on long-term attendees (and the 12 Steps were designed to work over a longer period of time). Furthermore-- even within the population of long-term group attendees, there is a smaller group of people whyo have actually worked 5 or more of the 12 Steps. This is the valid study population since these are the only people who are actually working the Steps (at least the first 5) on a long-term basis). Yet most studies don't make these distinctions-- counting instead the much parger percentage of people who have been to even a single meeting.

Consequently 'scientific' studies of 12 Step program effectiveness are often poorly constructed and don't even measure the application of the 12 Steps in one's daily life.

66.227.84.101 (talk) 17:00, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Assessment

This was posted on Wikipedia:WikiProject_Biography/Assessment#Requesting_an_assessment, but there's one key problem - it's not a biography. Other than that, I would not hesitate to mark it a B, this clearly meets or exceeds that standard, and yes, may be ready for WP:GA. You may try to submit it to Wikipedia:Peer review first. Some minor tweaks:

  • Grover Boydston - Grover's study - If Grover is his first name, it's "Boydston's study".
  • Though people who have been... ;Though there are also NAIL... - rephrase so as not to start with Though
  • No two Self-help group - groups, and lower case self, per our article Self-help
  • Similarly lower case Mutual Support and Peer Support organizations
  • It also seems a bit long, at 80 KB. See Wikipedia:Article size. Potential places to cut include the demographics section, the Effectiveness section (that doesn't seem to talk enough about this group specifically, but similar groups in general), the EA's original Tools and Guidelines for Recovery section.
  • Why is Neurotics Anonymous in Mexico a separate section; why is Mexico special?
  • Los Angles - mssplld

But in short, this is really good. --AnonEMouse (squeak) 00:36, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the suggestions! Sorry about putting the request in the biography section. I don't remember how I found my way there -- I think I was looking at the peer-review requirements and saw that they wanted articles at least at B level before they were submitted, and... I don't know. Anyway, I made most of the changes. I couldn't think of any other place to put the information under the Neurotics Anonymous in Mexico. It seemed to make sense since it came from two books that specifically studied Mexico and Mexico City. I think the best thing to cut, would be the "Tools and Guidelines for Recovery" as they're printed elsewhere on the Internet and link to them in the citation. Both the Effectiveness and Criticism sections have a fair amount of material that isn't specific too EA/NAIL/EHA, but I believe could be argued for and against them. -- Craigtalbert 04:24, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
I personally can't understand why this article did not get rated "A". — DavidMack 03:41, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
There's a special review process articles need to go through for A, GA, and FA status. B is the highest grade you can get without it. I haven't gotten around to submitting this one for peer-review yet. I should do that now. -- Craigtalbert 21:23, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Split with Self-help groups for mental health

Many of the studies I found while researching EA were more about self-help groups for mental health, or some other subset of self-help groups, than they were specifically about EA, NAIL, or EHA. I included most of it in this article, but that was probably a bad idea. One of the suggestions in peer-review was that the article was too long, so I created the new one for the information that wasn't specifically related to EA, NAIL or EHA. I'm going to continue to work on the peer-review suggestions, and will look at submitting it for A/GA/FA status afterwards. -- Craigtalbert 06:11, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reference citations

Be sure your reference citations meet the criteria set forth by Arbcom:

[edit] Please Correct Ratio

Sex: Boydston's study of NAIL members found approximately 36% were male, and 64% were female. This ratio, of three (or more) females for every male, has been reproduced in all other studies of self-help groups for persons with serious mental illness,[20] as well as specific studies of EA groups.[24][38]

This is inaccurate- the ratio would be more accurately illustrated as 1:2 instead of 1:3 . Either the percentages are incorrect or the person doing the ratio doesn't understand ratios. 23:22, 29 September 2007 Celtic Labyrinth 23:23, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, my mistake. If you find more errors like this, please correct them. -- Craigtalbert 00:34, 30 September 2007 (UTC)