User talk:Farahk

Welcome to Wikipedia!!!
note: i am trying to get rid of this code, that some random guy put on your page. it is unusable for the group, also it won't let me get rid of it Kaitlyn.s (talk) 21:16, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

--- So as of now we will be working on the (Suggestive Question topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AbdullaKhatib (talk • contribs) 21:29, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

here is the actual page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suggestive_questioning Kaitlyn.s (talk) 21:31, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Hey guys, so I added some additional insight to the Suggestive Question page. I added a few more sentences to the end of the first paragraph

AbdullaKhatib (talk) 00:42, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Hey guys, so I added a new section called "types of suggestive questions" and i wrote about six diffrent questions.--Farahk (talk) 06:37, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Hey all, so i added a new section about research done. It is not done yet, i just noticed the formatting is wrong, as well there are no citations. Kaitlyn.s (talk) 07:33, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

hey! so added last bit of the first paragraph into the right heading. Kaitlyn.s (talk) 16:36, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

hey! i added a new paragraph, and citations. if someone wants to look over those, because I'm not sure if i did those right. i also fixed my formatting, though I'm noticing a new errors that I'm going to go fix soon! Kaitlyn.s (talk) 17:26, 27 March 2012 (UTC) all right, I'm done the little format things, if anyone notices more go ahead and change them! also SHAY, please share the excellent work you have done on your sandbox as we can not get to it! Kaitlyn.s (talk) 17:31, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

i added my section into shays heading that he just posted. note to SHAY: please have a look. we wrote about two of the same things, maybe you can see how to combined the two. i did some on if. Kaitlyn.s (talk) 19:29, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Okay guys so I rearranged all of our content and made it into three basic categories. 1. Types of suggestive questions. 2. The research that has been done about it. 3. Effects on people and children. The first two have a lot of really good information and just needs to be edited. However, the third section needs work. I will work on it now, but I need help from people as well! Thank you! --Farahk (talk) 15:35, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

So I added another section called: Proffesionals using suggestive questioning. I also edited some content of other paragraphs. We should all meet at 4 today at UTM and make some final changes to the article!--Farahk (talk) 16:38, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

hey! i think "case studies" should go after effect, its a better flow into the subject. thoughts? Kaitlyn.s (talk) 19:50, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Hey guys, so I edited the research section and I added another example of research done regarding the subject. Hopefully it's sufficient and useful. Also, see you guys at 4pm today! AbdullaKhatib (talk) 20:04, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

We are together as of now. Debating whether we should remove the Effect section AbdullaKhatib (talk) 20:25, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

I have edited the types of suggestive questions making sure they are objective. It is on my word, and I shall be posting it shortly! Vikifilipek (talk) 20:30, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Anything else we could remove to make the article more concise? AbdullaKhatib (talk) 20:31, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

okay so it took out effect, and put the bit about kids under case studies. we also are about to read out loud together and see if stamens are not objective, and rather informative. Kaitlyn.s (talk) 20:33, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

moved the misinformation effect under the word choice and diction, because it fit better under that section Vikifilipek (talk) 21:10, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

as of now we have been working on completing this for 2.5 hours Vikifilipek (talk) 22:04, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

we have finished revising the section, and now putting the finishing touches on our work Vikifilipek (talk) 22:16, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

OKAY! After working as a group from 4-6:30, I am proud to say that we are finally done! We have made lots of contributions and changes to the article, and even experienced some technical difficulties (deleted everything we wrote!) EK. Thank you guys for everything you have donee!! It was a pleasure working with you guys :D --Farahk (talk) 22:51, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Oh and i put the Article banner on the talk page! --Farahk (talk) 23:29, 28 March 2012 (UTC)


 * I appreciate all the work you and your group of students have done for the suggestive question article, but please be mindful of proper procedure and policy for citations. I noticed some sources used as references appear to be forums, which are not permissible as sources, as anyone can write a forum post.  Also, some sources appear to be indirect. That is, the material you included was not in the paper linked to, but rather was referenced in that paper's bibliography. If possible, please make the citation to the actual paper.   Lastly, be careful to format citations properly, especially for journal articles.  So called "convenience links" (links to unofficial copies of the text rather than to the journal itself) are usually ok so long as the rest of the citation contains information that allows the paper to be looked up properly.  Here is a very useful tool for making journal and book citations on the fly using a PubMed ir ISBN:   -Legitimus (talk) 16:00, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia Education Program Student Survey
Hi! Please take a few minutes to fill out this survey about the Wikipedia Education Program. This is our opportunity to improve the program and resources we provide students, so your feedback and input is integral to our future success. Thank you so much! JMathewson (WMF) (talk) 00:02, 23 May 2012 (UTC)