User talk:FeatherPluma/Archive 3

Disambiguation link notification for February 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Oskar Vogt, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Extrapyramidal. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 15:10, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Done. FeatherPluma (talk) 06:33, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors!

 * please help translate this message into the local language

Thanks again :) -- Doc James  along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 03:59, 29 February 2016 (UTC)


 * thanks. FeatherPluma (talk) 06:33, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Bayer
Bayer went through a reorganization at the start of this year. I started revising that article but b/c they do GMO-related stuff I should not do more. Just wanted to ping you on this in case you are interested in bringing the article into line with current reality. I have also let XyZAn know, who also does good editing on pharma/biotech company articles. I also created this historical artifact today: Aurora Biosciences if you want to improve it... Jytdog (talk) 00:35, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Took a quick look. FeatherPluma (talk) 06:55, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
 * thanks! Jytdog (talk) 08:57, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Randolph Stone
Thank you for your helpful edits at Randolph Stone and thank you for finding additional sources. The Master ---)Vote Saxon(--- 22:58, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Appreciate the follow up. I had been thinking of doing some more edits but the article maybe has a good group supporting it so I perhaps I will just peek in and if things are progressing move to other attractions. Take care. FeatherPluma (talk) 02:13, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Student working on Ed. Technology Assessment
Hi there! I'm planning on expanding on the "Assessment" section of the Educational Technology article for my university writing class, and noticed that you have a number of edits over there. I want to work on both how assessments can be improved by technology and what specific technologies are useful for causing those improvements. Do you have any other suggestions/desires/ideas for where I could go? It'll probably be a few weeks before I publish a finished project as I haven't posted on WP before and I want to make sure it looks good first, but any tips and directions would be much appreciated at any time. Thanks! Doriineia (talk) 18:14, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for asking. By the way, many of us learn by doing here, because there's a lot to learn as you go along, so just be aware that it's hard to have a practical grip on all the guidelines right off. So... the good news, as you know, is that there is pretty much just two concepts that are scratching out a very basic placeholding in that section of the article, waiting for a brilliant new editor to expand them from their unhelpful nothingness. You have selected an area that can probably be improved if you find sources (note -- key concept: sources). So, sources -- maybe this will help:
 * {{find sources|assessing educational technology}
 * (this scholar search gives lots of refs -- hope some help !)
 * (and you can set up similar searches using that template if you want)
 * ...and from there, onward... e.g. maybe (I have not looked at any of this carefully, this is just a quick flash of possibilities, and I am not suggesting that any will actually help you) ---
 * Holcomb, Lori B.; Scott Brown,; Clarisse Lima,. "Assessing the Impact of a Performance-Based Assessment on Educators' Technology Self-Efficacy Measures." International Journal of Instructional Media. Westwood Press, Inc. 2010.
 * Nworie, John. "Adoption of Technologies in Higher Education: Trends and Issues."Technology Integration in Higher Education: Social and Organizational Aspects. IGI Global, 2011. 307-325. doi:10.4018/978-1-60960-147-8.ch022
 * Surry, Daniel W., Robert M. Gray Jr., and James R. Stefurak. "Technology Integration in Higher Education: Social and Organizational Aspects." IGI Global, 2011. 1-428. Web. 22 Nov. 2014. doi:10.4018/978-1-60960-147-8
 * Benchmarking educational technology for military planners. RT Goodden.
 * Keengwe, Jared, and Joachim Jack Agamba. "Models for Improving and Optimizing Online and Blended Learning in Higher Education." IGI Global, 2015. 1-320. Web. 22 Nov. 2014. doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-6280-3
 * Issa, Tomayess, Pedro Isaias, and Piet Kommers. "Multicultural Awareness and Technology in Higher Education: Global Perspectives." IGI Global, 2014. 1-449. Web. 22 Nov. 2014. doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-5876-9
 * Keengwe, Jared, and Marian B. Maxfield. "Advancing Higher Education with Mobile Learning Technologies: Cases, Trends, and Inquiry-Based Methods." IGI Global, 2015. 1-364. Web. 22 Nov. 2014. doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-6284-1
 * Tanya J. McGill, Jane E. Klobas, Stefano Renzi, Critical success factors for the continuation of e-learning initiatives, The Internet and Higher Education, Volume 22, July 2014, Pages 24-36, doi 10.1016/j.iheduc.2014.04.001.
 * King, Emma; Boyatt, Russell (2014) Exploring factors that influence adoption of e-learning within higher education British Journal of Educational Technology doi 10.1111/bjet.12195
 * I have absolutely no notion if any of this is going to be helpful. I imagine though that the searches will give you too much to fully digest. If so, look for what catches your eye, and maybe pick an angle or theme or something, and just chip away at it. I suggest you most probably should NOT set yourself the goal of an obsessive "perfect product" upload in several weeks as your ambition - but I don't know what your course instructions are. In fact, it would be much, much better from a Wikipedia perspective to do some gradual work here, as a gradual process, with little edits over and over, learning as you go. From what I know here, you don't approach this like the traditional way you would for a term paper with a final consolidated submission - but again make sure the instructions reflect this way of working. If they do not, your course instructor hasn't grasped how things work here, but there you have it. Also, I would let you know right off not to be disheartened if your work product gets chipped away by other editors - this would be a good thing because you would be collaboratively interacting.  I can't really promise to answer any more questions, but perhaps, if my mood is right, I can be helpful. Best wishes, as I am sure this project will go well for you. FeatherPluma (talk) 20:18, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Some of the more recent sources seem to be
 * Understanding Technology Literacy: A Framework for Evaluating Educational Technology Integration - Springer http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11528-011-0527-3
 * ERIC - Measuring the Effectiveness of Educational Technology: What Are We Attempting to Measure?, Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 2009 http://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ872411
 * Microsoft Word - India Questv1.doc http://cct.edc.org/sites/cct.edc.org/files/publications/Evaluating%20Educational%20Technology.pdf
 * Assessing the Costs and Benefits of Educational Technology - Springer http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4614-3185-5_19
 * EJ1064110.pdf http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1064110.pdf
 * Robust evaluation for a maturing field: The train the teacher method http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221286891300010X
 * Information Technology in Health Science Education - Google Books https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=9d7cBwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA465&dq=%22evaluating+educational+technology%22&ots=iOVYhCIQjL&sig=vHeOcFZdUIZlO2-Ivh_Z4rMK6vk#v=onepage&q&f=false
 * 21st Century Learning: Exploring the Classroom Experience - Learning & Technology Library (LearnTechLib) http://www.editlib.org/noaccess/112190/
 * Frantzeska_KOLYDA_2013.pdf http://westminsterresearch.wmin.ac.uk/14467/4/Frantzeska_KOLYDA_2013.pdf
 * Proceedings Template - WORD http://old-classes.design4complexity.com/7702-F13/proceedings/p85.pdf
 * Never Send a Human to Do a Machine's Job: Correcting the Top 5 EdTech Mistakes - Yong Zhao, Gaoming Zhang, Jing Lei, Wei Qiu - Google Books https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=bDESCgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=%22evaluating+educational+technology%22&ots=jTEUrMKuEP&sig=QhPQI_74Ws7u22hbM5oxsdQXV34#v=onepage&q=%22evaluating%20educational%20technology%22&f=false
 * scholarworks.waldenu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2969&context=dissertations http://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2969&context=dissertations
 * FeatherPluma (talk) 03:23, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
 * scholarworks.waldenu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2969&context=dissertations http://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2969&context=dissertations
 * FeatherPluma (talk) 03:23, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Intelligent tutor system
Hello! I'm here about this revert of my edit. It's a very minor thing, but I was just wondering if my interpretation of MOS:BOLDSYN, which appears to prescribe the bolding of abbreviations, is incorrect. If it is incorrect, I may have to dig up a lot of my edits and revert them. Thanks, and have a nice day! Me, Myself &#38; I (☮) (talk) 01:17, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I reverted to your correct interpretation. Thank you for the refresher. (I had the mistaken memory it was because NaOH is visually distinct from sodium hydroxide that it's bolded, but I see the bolding is correct even when it's a visually obvious abbreviation. And I see that the are not bolded in the example. You had it perfect. FeatherPluma (talk) 01:33, 25 March 2016 (UTC) ☮☮☮☮☮
 * Thanks so much! Phew. My previous edits are safe. Me, Myself &#38; I (☮) (talk) 01:55, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Absolutely. Thanks again. FeatherPluma (talk) 16:00, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Re: Death of Dawn Brancheau
I don't see any consensus for moving this article to a new title on the talk page, which is the proper venue for such a discussion. But, at the same time, I don't see a problem with letting other editors have their pyrrhic victory. Unless and until they start trying to use the new title as an excuse to change the actual information contained in the article, well, as they say, you can't read a book by its cover.

Nah, I'm kidding, I moved right back. :) New battle scars are probably coming my way though. -- Kendrick7talk 02:58, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Good job. FeatherPluma (talk) 06:41, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

Other refs -

Dawn Brancheau - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dawn_Brancheau#SeaWorld

Wikipedia:Article titles - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Article_titles#Use_commonly_recognizable_names

Gabriela Cowperthwaite, 'Blackfish' Director, Discusses Tilikum And Orcas In Captivity http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/23/gabriela-cowperthwaite-blackfish_n_2528286.html

"Dawn Brancheau" - Google Search https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Dawn+Brancheau%22&safe=off&biw=1920&bih=1085&tbm=nws&ei=pIIQV5buNYSHjgSVyoq4BA&start=40&sa=N

"Dawn Brancheau" - Google Search https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Dawn+Brancheau%22&safe=off&biw=1920&bih=1085&tbm=nws&ei=EYkQV6ylGui-jgTg1YewCg&start=50&sa=N

Dawn Brancheau death video ruling: Dawn Brancheau: Judge rejects family's bid to seal death video, photos - tribunedigital-orlandosentinel http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2011-09-15/news/os-dawn-brancheau-death-video-ruling-20110915_1_dawn-brancheau-work-with-killer-whales-whales-without-adequate-protection

Death at SeaWorld -- Should Videotapes of the Killing be Released? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/death-at-seaworld-should-_b_966809.html

SeaWorld debuts safety vests 4 years after Dawn Brancheau's death - Washington Times http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/apr/29/seaworld-debuts-safety-vests-4-years-after-dawn-br/

Blackstone chief blames Brancheau for own death, contradicting Seaworld - Orlando Sentinel http://www.orlandosentinel.com/business/tourism/tourism-central-florida-blog/os-blackstone-chief-blames-brancheau-for-own-death-contradicting-seaworld-20140124-post.html

SeaWorld orca show ban credited to work of Blackfish documentary maker | ABC Radio Australia http://www.radioaustralia.net.au/international/2016-03-18/seaworld-orca-show-ban-credited-to-work-of-blackfish-documentary-maker/1560186

SeaWorld: ‘Blackfish’ is propaganda, not documentary | Universal, SeaWorld and More - WESH Home http://www.wesh.com/themeparks/other/seaworld-blackfish-is-propaganda-not-documentary/24031120

Public Offering Values SeaWorld at $2.5 Billion - The New York Times http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2013/04/18/seaworld-prices-i-p-o-at-top-of-range/?_r=1

http://www.earthisland.org/journal/index.php/elist/eListRead/in_conversation_with_jeffrey_ventre/

http://www.npr.org/2015/03/23/394730076/former-orca-trainer-for-seaworld-condemns-its-practices

Disambiguation link notification for April 23
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nuclear Torpedo, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page W34. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:15, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Done. FeatherPluma (talk) 05:13, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

May 2016
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=718712963 your edit] to Burkitt's lymphoma may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 05:06, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
 * medscape.com/article/1447602-overview and the Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) 8811 regimen; these can be associated with rituximab.
 * Done. FeatherPluma (talk) 05:13, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Zhenya Gershman
Hello FeatherPluma - can you please help me insert back this information: Gershman's portrait of Sting will be featured in the permanent collection at Arte Al Limite Museum to be open in 2017 in Santiago, Chile. Here is the citation source: https://www.arteallimite.com/featured_item_category/coleccion/ Many thanks for your wonderful elegant touch! Jon Deen (talk) 23:10, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Very happy indeed to oblige. FeatherPluma (talk) 13:52, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Laughing
It makes me happy when I see you show up at any article. :) Jytdog (talk) 00:34, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
 * You too. I just wish I was as able to get as much done as you are. But within my limits I chip away at it. FeatherPluma (talk) 06:04, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Merger discussion for Decentralized autonomous organization
An article that you have been involved in editing&mdash;Decentralized autonomous organization&mdash;has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 17:39, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you for asking. I can bring a comfortably informed opinion to many pages. However, this article is too many notches from territory that is properly familiar to me. Compared to when I last looked at it, I think the content and sourcing have improved, that real world events are in play right now, and that the content is more comprehensible than it originally was to a general reader. I am not sure it's that great an article yet, but I would informally have thought the thing to do would be to let it run "as is" for a bit longer, and see where the tides of time take it and its real world correlate(s). That is, I would informally not be in favor of merger. For what it's worth, I would probably just let the tags abide their time, and not be in a great hurry to define the issues too firmly, too quickly - that is, I'd just let them sit and stew unless there was specific commentary on particular points. So I don't feel I can provide any semi-solid thinking about this topic in the merger analysis. FeatherPluma (talk) 19:04, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi, no worries. I notified all the editors of the page as a courtesy to gain more feedback from previous editors. Thank you :-) Jtbobwaysf (talk) 05:12, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community Survey
The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.
 * Survey, (hosted by Qualtrics)

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:48, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Sribhashyam Vijayasarathi
this is regarding the deletion of sribhashyam vijayasarathi. This was copied from a blog where that blog belongs to his son. We both together trying to put this page. PLease syggest to whom we need to send mail regarding the permissions? Could you please provide a mail ID. its difficult to commmunicate in this forum. We dont know with whom we are talking and whether response will come or not. Speedy deletion nomination of Sribhashyam Vijayasarathi[edit] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lpskumar (talk • contribs) 05:24, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I suggest that you would do far better to gather up independent sources that properly speak to the subject's notability, rather than spending any time on this blog which has no relevancy from an encyclopedic viewpoint. I don't have a particular interest within the domain of Sanskrit poets and I cannot help you within its specific area of competency. For general questions, you might choose to read the guidelines or to visit the Teahouse. The link to the Teahouse was placed on your talk page. I am sorry but I have nothing further to add to this topic. FeatherPluma (talk) 21:22, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

A page you started (Fluciclovine) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating Fluciclovine, FeatherPluma!

Wikipedia editor Damibaru just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

"Looks good. Unfortunately I don't understand a single word of it, but with my credentials, who can wonder? However, sometimes the '18F' is written [18F], and other times [18F]. I don't know if that is on purpose or not. Just wanted to bring it up. Cheers!"

To reply, leave a comment on Damibaru's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.
 * Done. FeatherPluma (talk) 21:33, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barbara Meneley (2nd nomination)
I appreciate your very astute comments here, and need to think about these matters further. My tentative thought is that I agree with you about tightening up 4B. I understood that a meaning something like the Armory Show or Salon des Refusés. I suggest we change the wording to  "has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition of national or historical importance"  DGG ( talk ) 05:00, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I am unreservedly in favor of that wording change. Please let me know if there is any way I can assist. FeatherPluma (talk) 22:33, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Re: Dawn Brancheau
Hey Feather! Your request from 6 July somehow got lost in the shuffle (my user talk page often involves people yelling at me — or at least it sometimes feels that way — so I don't always pay attention to it if I'm not in a very good mood, or if I've recently done something impish).

I've now given this a partial shot; I'd have enjoyed being a rewrite man back in the day! Mostly just added some links, stuck in a few missing verbs and fixed other minor awkward prose, and tightened some prose that I found to be just a tad too rambling and which didn't seem to me to convey anything particularly important to the subject at hand. Feel free to revert whatever you'd like.

I myself never worry about Article Class. Surely 99%+ of our reader don't know what that even is; and you've nevertheless helped write an excellent article. One "flaw", about which I don't have a problem with in this case at all, but which the "higher ups" who make these Class decisions might note, is your reliance on a WP:PRIMARY source (court documents) for some of the OSHA stuff. As such, it might be better to let sleeping dogs lie, as you've made a fair gloss of the source, in my opinion, and it's an important part of the story. -- Kendrick7talk 01:32, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi Thanks for the improvement. A fresh pair of eyes helps a lot. (Rewrite Man gets to wear a nice bright colored outfit, maybe Impish Bright Green with Orange Trim? - Just don't do the Ingsoc rewrites - they are too dark.) I might at some point go back to the sources regarding the video link between SeaWorld and Tenerife as, if I remember correctly, this was part of the judge's reasoning for why the DB event was not a once off fluke but was one indicator that the operant conditioning methodology was a systematic failure, given the closeness of the two programs and AM's death in the water. As far as court documents, I would take the position that the witnesses' and attornies' contributions are PRIMARY but the judge's analyses (summing up) is SECONDARY, in that the process is intellectually of that order. I think I have seen this position successfully withstand criticism in other areas in Wikipedia. But I will take the hint regarding how far and how high to fly. No need to test if the wings are held together with wax, even though I suspect they are not. Now if they gave out a nice set of togs with Impish Bright Green with Orange Trim for a good try, would I push along...??? Thanks again! FeatherPluma (talk) 02:56, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Rereading it, you are right about the video link. The point is made clearly enough already with the factors listed. Adding that there was a video link is too many nails. FeatherPluma (talk) 03:24, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I frankly couldn't quite make heads or tails out of the sentence in context. Were the videos of the orcas on the airplanes? But, meh, whatever.
 * You have a point about judicial rulings being close to "secondary" sources, but I got annoyed about it when someone close to the case of Troy Davis very selectively used court documents to throw the book at him some time after his execution. Glancing at the article again now, I suspect things have since balanced out, but it's too depressing for a close read. The truth is that my lazy effort at spreading human knowledge couldn't save an innocent man's life. :( But still, we pick up the torch, whether our wings get singed by it or not. -- Kendrick7talk 05:16, 30 July 2016 (UTC)