User talk:Samvak

Good start at the Narcisistic Personality Disorder page. But it needs major wikification. Is this according to DSM-IV? In general, we should get rid of the pasive voice and replace it with more informative content. Is this disorder recognized by all psychiatrists? Clinical psychologists? Only some psychologists? Slrubenstein

Sam:

Thanks, Slrubenstein. Yes, as the article states, the criteria reflect the latest Text Revision of the DSM (DSM IV-TR, 2000). NPD is a personality disorder and an official diagnosis of the DSM. I am the author of a textbook on this disorder ("Malignant Self Love - Narcissism Revisited"). Take care!

---

Hello, sorry about removing your Pathological narcissism entry, I thought it was some random user dumping copyrighted text from the web. Anyway, welcome to Wikipedia! If you ever need editing help visit Wikipedia:How does one edit a page or how to format them visit our manual of style. Experiment at Wikipedia:Sandbox. If you need pointers on how we title pages visit Wikipedia:Naming conventions and if you have any other questions about the project then check out Wikipedia:Help or add a question to the Village pump. Regards. -- Notheruser 19:15 19 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Sam:

No sweat! Thank you for the pointers. Take care!

ack and reply

Hi Sam, thanks for your kind works on my Talk page re. the article on Narcissism. BTW, I left you a question on the Talk page of that article a few weeks ago, if you have a moment. Also, in case you didn't know, if you type four twiddles (~), at the end of your messages in the Talk pages, the system automatically inserts your username, and date and time. Bye for now! -- Viajero 11:26, 13 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Hi Sam. I found you because someone had added your page on Abuse to the Wikipedia:Cleanup page, which is an indication that it needs work. While your page contains a lot of useful information, it's not really written in an encyclopedic style. It looks like a personal essay, with factual information mixed with personal opinions and advice.

Can I suggest that you visit it again, and have a look at some other articles to see what the preferred style is? Try reading Wikipedia:Manual of Style for more information.

Also because Wikipedia is about shared authorship, we never sign contributions.

Thanks for your contributions, and keep them coming. DJ Clayworth 15:52, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Narcissism article

Dear Sam, thanks for the offer of help. What I think the narcissism article needs is a solid background on the psychoanalytical theory of narcissism. I have an extremely rudimentary knowledge of this and think that it should have a discussion of the first years of life with primary and secondary narcissism explained in a way that an ordinary encyclopedia reader can understand. This should then flow on to how this affects the teenager and adult. Some of this later stuff is in the article.

There are still some areas left in the narcissistic PD article that really belong in the narcissism article, e.g.

Narcissists are either Cerebral (derive their narcissistic supply from their intelligence or academic achievements) — or Somatic (derive their narcissistic supply from their physique, exercise, physical or sexual prowess and "conquests").

Narcissists are either "Classic" (meet five of the nine diagnostic criteria included in the DSM) or they are "Compensatory" (their narcissism compensates for deepset feelings of inferiority and lack of self-worth).

Some narcissists are Covert or Inverted Narcissists - as codependents they derive their narcissistic supply from their relationships with classic narcissists.

In general I believe the PD article should follow a more DSM format and not refer to "narcissists" but to "individuals with narcissistic PD" or more colloquially "people with ...". There is a trend away from labelling a person AS a disorder. This could be followed in the narcissism article as "individuals with narcissistic traits".

If you have the time to flesh out the narcissism article in any way we would all be grateful for your efforts. There is no reason why this couldn't be a 30 KB major article.

I hope to send you an email using your website to arrange to get a copy of your book. --CloudSurfer 06:55, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Dear CloudSurfer, Beefed up the narcissism article as per your excellent suggestion. But, my editing skills are below par, to use an understatement. Can you guys help me edit the articles both cosmetically (subtitles, internal links) and substantially (irrelevant sections)?

The paras you quote ("Some narcissists are Covert" etc.) should remain in the narcissistic personality disorder article because they describe various forms of the disorder (cerebral vs. somatic, classic, compensatory, inverted, etc.). These variants are NOT part of healthy narcissism.

Awaiting your communication and help with gratitude. Samvak

I see what you are saying about the those paragraphs but surely they are present in traits at lower levels before they reach the level of a PD. If they stay in the PD article then I would propose we reword the "Narcissists ..." to "Narcissistic defences ..." or something that takes the label away from the person.

I have just opened the narcissism article to find it has been expanded to a major degree. WOW. I have not read it yet. Two things I immediately noticed are that the headings are not yet Wiki, and I will do that as part of a proofread, and it has many references but these are not at the bottom in the reference section. This latter issue needs your tender loving care Sam as you have the references. --CloudSurfer 19:40, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)

OK! I have read the article and must congratulate you on synthesising an extremely complex field. I have put in headings to try to structure it so that a reader is usually likely to have a heading on their screen as they read the text. I have made some minor text changes which you can see by pressing the "history" tab and comparing your last version with my last version. What I am not sure about just now is whether the text is accessible to someone who does not have a grounding in the theories. At this stage I think I will let it alone for a while and come back to it. In the meantime there may be more comments. I have added your book under further reading. I would have liked to have put a link to it but unfortunately your pages would be seen as too commercial and thus the link would be liable to be deleted. Still anyone will find them with an internet search for the book title. --CloudSurfer 22:42, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Hi Sam and CloudSurfer, Good work on the Narcissism article! It has become very comprehensive. My compliments. Sietse 08:46, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Hi, CloudSurfer, Sietse Snel, I wish I could wikify like you! Wondeful job, CloudSurfer!!! As per your comment, I substantially extended the bibliography at the end of narcissism. Feel free to edit to your heart's content. Next I will edit the narcissistic personality disorder article to remove the stigmatizing labels. Way to go, guys! PS: Would you like to collaborate on the personality disorders articles? I have authored the Open Site definitions (see external link in personality disorder ) Samvak

Thanks for the bibliography. I will go through some time and change those references in the text to numbers like this¹ and then move each reference into a section called References. Thanks Sam for your intended edit to the narcissistic PD article. Please feel free to edit any of the PD articles. Sam, I have sent you an email from my Samoan work address requesting the digital copy of the book. By the way, does anyone have a nice, public domain picture of Narcissisus sitting by the water? --CloudSurfer 04:55, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Book on its way (Sietse Snel, the offer still stands). Sent you two images which I believe (but cannot prove) are public domain. Next, will see what I can contribute to the personality disorder entry. Let's work closely together, if it fits you, guys! Samvak

Sam, thanks for the book and images. I am very pleased to work with you on the PD area. After you have done something make a note of it at the Wikipedia:WikiProject Psychopathology/Review page. I am following that and it allows the entire project to know of it. You can separate each entry with the line you see at the extreme right of the buttons on the top of the edit window. Also, please make any changes AFTER you have logged in so that we know who it is, not some arbitrary IP address. Sign and date your entry with the second from the right button. --CloudSurfer 17:55, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Plagiarizing yourself? I wanted to let you know people like me are out there noticing copywriting errors. I am writing a paper on this narcissism, and have your article from Mentalhelp.net and noticed it was some of the same writing in this encyclopedia. I thought there were rules on citing your own work as well though.

Ronningstam / Roningstam

What is the correct spelling? The internet is evenly divided on this but seems to be more authoratative for the "nn" version. --CloudSurfer 21:07, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Right you are! Correct name is RoNNingstam. RoNingstam is a typo!Samvak

Personality disorder article

Hey, I should thank you instead of the other way around! In my opinion, your contribution about criticism of personality disorders makes very good points. Keep up the good work! Sietse 19:43, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Dear Sam, I have goodnaturedly added a contrary "defence of DSM" to the controversy. See what you think. The ball is now in your court. [Grin] By the way, to sign your name, use the second from the right button in the edit windows. This will insert "--~~~~" [minus the quotes] which will be interpreted as two dashes and then your user name and time/date when you save the edit. If you only used "~~~" then you would just get your user name without a timestamp. --CloudSurfer 20:16, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Narcissism

My apologies for removing your text. --Tothebarricades 19:25, August 28, 2005 (UTC)

And another apology. Sorry about the sock puppet thing a while back. I was a bit confused and I made a mistake. Hope you have a Merry Christmas! --DanielCD 15:14, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry case

You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Samvak for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familliar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. Zeraeph 18:57, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry case

You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Samvak(2nd) for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familliar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. Zeraeph 18:57, 10 June 2006 (UTC)--Zeraeph 12:40, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Sockpuppets

Iolakana|(talk) 15:50, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry case

You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Samvak (3rd) for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familliar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page.

Sockpuppetry

For continuing to violate your block using IP addresses I am resetting your block. Iolakana|^T 18:06, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry case

You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Samvak (4th) for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. Zeraeph 11:16, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Dr. Sam Vaknin

To whom it may concern,

I have recently been undertaking a significant amount of research and feel this is as good a place to warn anyone. The individual referring to himself as Dr. Sam Vaknin has no educational qualifications of any merit or legitimacy, and was incarcerated for a period in the mid 90s, further casting doubt over his reputation. A confirmed sufferer of Narcissistic Personality Disorder, this individual is an avid self promoter and has disseminated vast amounts of his publications across the internet. When undertaking research on economics, finance, monetary unions (especially the history thereof), Macedonia, psychology and Narcissistic Personality Disorder, please ensure this individual is not the author of the said work, as factual errors or inaccuracies may be prevalent throughout the work and, despite the plausability of his publications, his reputation casts an unquestionable shadow of doubt over his professional undertakings. I have wasted my time on this individual, and intend only to spare you the same.

Sincerely,

V —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.72.110.11 (talk) 09:44, 11 July 2008 (UTC)