Talk:Gelotology

Medicine Low‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Comedy Mid‑importance

	Comedy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This page (Gelotology) exists in other languages too. Why aren't they listed? (I can't do that)

For example there's Polish: pl.wiki.x.io/wiki/Gelotologia

and Italian: it.wiki.x.io/wiki/Gelotologia

80.221.178.252 07:16, 20 March 2007 (UTC)A concerned citizenReply

Fixed. Thanks for informing! 石川 (talk) 06:10, 13 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

Spiritual Issues

Latest comment: 16 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

I'm removing a reference to "spiritual issues". If someone confirms that such issues exist, feel free to undo my edit.

-70.119.126.195 (talk) 13:16, 5 October 2008 (UTC)Reply

I also decided to change the word "mental" to "psychological".

-70.119.126.195 (talk) 13:18, 5 October 2008 (UTC)Reply

Possible copyright violation

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Three days ago, someone at IP address 98.163.220.147 (talk) wrote in the article, saying "WikiEditors: this article's text was apparently borrowed from a company brochure." This seems plausible based on some of the promotional language in the article, but I don't know how to tell if it's true. The IP may simply have been judging by the promotional language, and not actually have seen the same text elsewhere. I'm posting about it at Wikipedia talk:Copyright problems, since this doesn't seem to be a very busy page. A. Parrot (talk) 00:02, 21 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

Sorry - I think I deleted a section

Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I take issue with the following sentence; "This has led to new and beneficial therapies practiced by doctors, psychiatrists, and other mental health professionals using humor and laughter to help patients cope or treat a variety of physical and psychological issues." Why are doctors and psychiatrists mentioned, wouldn't all psychiatrists be doctors, the distinction seems arbitrary and ambigous. If by 'doctors' one means to imply medical doctors (which psychiatrists are) would it not be more appropriate to state 'physicians' rather than doctors. There appears to be a distinction in the way it is written that appears to be somewhat arbitrary with regards to the whole 'doctors, psychiatrists...' and so forth portion. This is my fist Wikipedia input and don't know if I'm writing this in the proper place, but I think improvement is possible here and would like to help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ddmatt (talk • contribs) 06:42, 1 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

I deleted professions altogether, since the rest of the paragraph says that individuals themselves can use these therapies (I guess after looking them up in wikipedia :-) <laugh-hlaugh shigger-snigger> Kaligelos (talk) 17:29, 3 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

Add topic