Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 00:41, 10 December 2007

Article Should not be a Vehicle for LinkSPAM and Promotion of non notable Agenda

It has already been determined (Talk:Cassandra phenomenon) that Maxine Aston and Faas.org are non-notable and unencyclopeadic for inclusion in even a more general article let alone in one that specifically relates to psychology. Both are self published, not peer reviewed and (in the case of Maxine Aston) tend to change the name of their DIY disorder regularly.

I also notice that the IPs from which repeated efforts are made to promote these two agenda are made originate in the same small town in Australia and I would like to point out that, at this point, the line into WP:SOCK is very close to being crossed. --Zeraeph (talk) 07:00, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Zeraeph, When you say "it has already been determined that Maxine Aston and FAAAS are non-notable" it is important to not mislead readers by omitting that it is you personally, along with your sidekick CeilingCrash, who is doing the aforementioned "determining". FAAAS is a non-profit, reliable secondary source of note, and Maxine Aston's work also qualifies as notable. Maxine Aston also holds a Master's degree in Health Psychology which qualifies her to coin and apply a "psychological metaphor" to certain groups of individuals. Finally, the reference to Aston's work on the FAAAS page does not qualify as Link spam.

Your repeated efforts to attack Maxine Aston are well known to Misplaced Pages editors, and I suggest that rather than pointing out "other peoples agenda", you look instead at your own repeated efforts to blank all mention of her from the internet.

Anyway, this is the place to discuss changes, and I recommend that you suggest changes here before going on another blanking spree without gaining editor consensus.

Regards- Goddessculture (talk) 07:15, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

The Faaas page does not meet criteria for WP:RS for any article, let alone one related to psychology. Faaas is a small self appointed organisation of Amateurs that does not even meet WP:NOTE. Maxine Aston is neither formally published nor in any way peer reviewed. In addition, "health psychology" is hardly a relevant field. --Zeraeph (talk) 10:04, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. Without evidence for the notability/reliability of either FAAAS or Maxine Aston, there is no place in this article for her/their ideas. Someguy1221 (talk) 11:36, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Misrepresenting an editor to another editor to suppress information is NOT the way to create a dignified article. FAAAS does qualify as a reliable and notable secondary source for Maxine Aston's metaphorical use of the Cassandra metaphor, and it does not qualify as "linkSPAM". Have your way with it, Zeraeph. Goddessculture (talk) 12:06, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Ironically, it was none other than Zeraeph herself who suggested in the that this present 'Cassandra complex' page be established: "renaming to Cassandra complex seems an obvious next move here". Remind me to not follow such advice in future. Goddessculture (talk) 12:23, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Faaas is a small amateur organisation that, it's self published, unaccredited website is not a notable and reliable for anything.

I do not in any way object to the creation of this article (though it should be merged with Cassandra phenomenon) I have not requested it's deletion. I simply object to the abuse of this article for the promotion of non notable agenda, and the use of sockpuppets, in a manner against policy, in it's creation. Particularly when neither invalid source has ever used the term at all. --Zeraeph (talk) 12:44, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Merger Proposal

Regarding Zeraeph's I'd like to suggest that the Cassandra phenomenon page is presently a bric-a-brac which attempts to merge all metaphorical uses of the mythic Cassandra figure under the idiosyncratic adjective "phenomenon": a word NOT used by most authors. I.e. the Cassandra phenomenon entry gathers disparate mentions of "Cassandra" from such sources as psychologists, myth, and movies and places them under a title designed by Tony Attwood for use specifically in the context of Asperger's syndrome relationships.

As soon as you employ a single title such as "Cassandra phenomenon" you immediately disqualify the other phrases and their varied definitions, eg. 'Cassandra complex', or 'Cassandra disorder', or 'Cassandra syndrome', or 'Cassandra in cinema', or 'Cassandra in pop-culture'. (PS. as a good pop-culture example we have the environmentalist movement employing "Cassandra" to people who are disbelieved when they talk about looming environmental disasters such as global warming).

Therefore the ONLY way to avoid an unworkable synthesis is to title a new page "Cassandra as metaphor" (or similar) and then list the subcategories: Environment, Psychology, Movies, In popular-culture, etc. Such a move allows all the disparate material to be displayed as examples of this one mythic metaphor. Alternatively all these metaphorical uses of Cassandra could all be placed on the Cassandra (Greek mythology) entry. Goddessculture (talk) 21:28, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

A violation of WP:SYN can be avoided through proper wording to ensure no implications of similarities unsupported by the provided sources. But I'm not sure how this would be possible to do, or whether a merger is necessary. Someguy1221 (talk) 22:15, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

As 'Cassandra phenomenon' was coined to refer explicitly to Asperger syndrome relationships, I cannot see how a mention of the Cassandra theme in hysteria (for example), or in movies (for example) can be subsumed under 'Cassandra phenomenon' simply by 'proper rewording'. The title precludes it. Nevertheless, I wish editors all the best in attempting such a move, if they attempt it, and I look on with interest. Goddessculture (talk) 22:47, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

As it turned out on the day 'Cassandra phenomenon' had NEVER actually been coined to refer to ANYTHING in any truly encyclopaedic way, and should have been re-named to "Cassandra Complex". BUT it COULD be used as a descriptive umbrella term that would cover both "complex" and "syndrome" as both useages are similar and remarkably obscure. --Zeraeph (talk) 23:12, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

As far as I know, in the given sources 'Cassandra complex' refers specifically to the metaphorical use of Cassandra in cases of hysteria. Goddessculture (talk) 23:29, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

proposed structure for merger

Cassandra as metaphor

LEAD: (maybe something like) Cassandra was a figure from Greek mythology whose prophetic insights into the future were disbelieved by her contemporaries, but which nevertheless came true. This Greek myth has been taken up in modern times and employed as a metaphor for individuals who experience physical and emotional suffering as a result of distressing personal circumstances, and who are disbelieved when they attempt to share the cause of their suffering with others.

The Greek Cassandra myth:

The Cassandra metaphor in psychology:

Laurie Layton Schapira on 'hysteria'

Jean Shinoda-Bolen on the 'Cassandra woman'

Tony Attwood on Asperger's relationships

Melanie Klein on Guilt? (apparently she uses the Cassandra metaphor in her 1963 'Envy and Gratitude' though I have not read it).

The Cassandra metaphor in popular culture:

Movies

In the environment movement

Thats all I've got. Goddessculture (talk) 23:15, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Can't use Tony Attwood by consensus, particularly as he disavowed his own usage ( http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:Cassandra_phenomenon&diff=117664992&oldid=116893190 ). I do not see why you cannot log in under your original username and acknowledge you various WP:COI and WP:POV? --Zeraeph (talk) 23:32, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

I have disused the Soulgany101 account and created the Goddessculture account, and I have not overlapped their use. I have also notified Misplaced Pages management of that change. Regarding WP:COI the only person I can see this applies to is yourself. Goddessculture (talk) 23:34, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

I am glad you have decided to "come out" I do not personally admire sneaky behavior. Now all you need to do is "disuse" your original User:Soulgany I hope from now on you will be logging in and not confusing the issue with multiple IPs as well? WP:COI doesn't apply to me at all. I am not the one who tries to use Misplaced Pages to promote people I share a publisher with. --Zeraeph (talk) 00:41, 10 December 2007 (UTC)