User talk:Amead

Hello Amead, welcome to Wikipedia. Excellent article on Item response theory! I just wondered if it should be moved to Item Response Theory though. I've nearly always seen the capitalised version used.

Some pages you might find useful are: how to write a great article, naming conventions, manual of style and the Wikipedia policies. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Angela. 12:53, Jan 4, 2004 (UTC)

Ok, but my thought was that the original wording sounded a bit anti-testing. However, I'm happy with the way it reads now. I normally try to avoid editing topics like this as I'm way too biased about it. :) Angela. 19:44, Jan 5, 2004 (UTC)

Jimbo Visit
I will be at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign 23 October, 2004, speaking at the ACM Reflections | Projections Conference 2004 -

This conference runs from 22. - 24. October 2004; it would be fantastic to have a Wikipedia booth, if I can get volunteers for it.

Do you think you could come? Jimbo Wales 16:20, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)

MBTI
Could I invite your comments on our discussion over at the MBTI entry?--Coroebus 14:46, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

IRT
Hey Amead, Stephenhumphry 03:39, 30 July 2005 (UTC) here. Wanted to get in touch about item response theory article. I reverted changes, and have outlined my concerns in the discussion. I don't want to get into a debate about Rasch vs IRT coz I don't think it is productive -- but I wonder whether you think I'm biased. You're right, there is sometimes bitter debate, but should this appear in the article? To make my position clear, my research deals with discrimination. I see both sides. The Rasch model is too prescriptive, but the 2PLM is problematic. Both are far better than CTT, and the article should reflect the most important features of IRT in a balanced way. Point is, I'd rather work with you to make the article as cohesive and strong as possible, and just wanted to get in touch.

Guttman Scale
Howdy,

I'm doing some work on improving the various articles that relate to classical psychometric scaling techniques. I was wondering if you could take a look at Guttman scale, which talks about Louis Guttman's unidimensional cumulative model.

Klonimus 02:47, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Five Factor Model
It has now been redirected thanks to user:Extreme Unction. Thank you, for the notification. - Akamad 19:32, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

CAT article and vandalism
There is no need to get upset about a silly template. The computer-adaptive test article just needs some good citations. There is certainly no need to commit such acts of vandalism as completely erasing the article. As you probably noticed, it was another user who reverted your edit, not me. So there are other people out there that agree with me that this article just needs some good citations.

You claim to be a psychometrician, so I'm going to guess that you've had to write papers and maybe some articles. When you receive feedback about the papers or articles, do you just shred them? I'm guessing not. You probably accept the feedback and make the necessary changes. So why don't we work like that here?

– Chris53516 (Talk) 14:35, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Eleven songs-300x280.png
 Thanks for uploading File:Eleven songs-300x280.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Aspects (talk) 18:57, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Amead! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created  is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the article:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 01:51, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Lewis Goldberg -

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Eleven songs-300x280.png
Thank you for uploading File:Eleven songs-300x280.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Aspects (talk) 23:43, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:12, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:25, 29 November 2022 (UTC)