User talk:Frakn

Frakn, the material you added to the John Bowlby article on 22 February involves direct quotes from the article abstract-- would you please either provide quotation marks and page numbers, or else paraphrase? Thanks. Jean Mercer (talk) 16:42, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have added quotation marks and a page number to the abstract from the Attachment & Human Development article. Frakn (talk) 14:05, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Frakn - there's been the odd discussion over on the Attachment theory page about the extent to which "attachment theory" today is still Bowlby's attachment theory and how to best represent developments or changes in the attachment theory article. What do you think? Fainites ^barley 21:27, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Frakn - did you write this bit?[1] If so, is the citation in the first paragraph also the citation for most of the second paragraph? (The last sentence is cited to a 1950 paper). I've reffed it to Bowlby himself as its a fair summary of what he says - I just wondered though if it came from a specific secondary source. I've read your Hinde interview by the way. Jolly interesting. I'll get round to putting some of it in the article when I have a moment. Fainites ^barley 21:22, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fainites - No, I did not write any of this. Frakn (talk) 07:20, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK Thanks. Fainites ^barley 07:27, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

History of attachment theory[edit]

Frakn - the peer reviewer on Attachment theory thought the history section was too long so I created a separate article with it here History of attachment theory and have tried to summarise the section in Attachment theory. A History article can contain a lot more detail and interesting stuff than just the attachment theory article could and I thought you might be interested in having a go at it - it being "your thing". Fainites ^barley 15:44, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]