User talk:Haylee.schumacher

Nice work!
Posted automatically via sandbox guided tour. Haylee.schumacher (talk) 21:57, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Welcome!
Hello, Haylee.schumacher, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Ian and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.

I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please complete the student training, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 15:38, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Possible Topics for History and Systems Project
I noticed in assignment two that the page for Jack Levin was a stub, so that could be a possible topic. I haven't gotten a chance to look for any information on him yet though, so we'd have to make sure there is enough information to write about.

There are also a lot of other psychologist stubs that we could focus on. It may be nice to write about an actual psychologist, because then we can have a section on their personal history as well as descriptions of their research. Haylee.schumacher (talk) 20:36, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

I agree that we should pick a topic about a psychologist. I was looking at the list of psychologist stubs and found a few that needed major expansion. I haven't checked if there is enough information out there yet. I found George Estabrooks and Nancy Bayley for potential topics. Sarah.bourassa (talk) 22:45, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

I looked at the Wiki pages for both Estabrooks and Bayley, and both seem like excellent choices. I did a quick search for them on Google and Google Scholar, and there is a lot of information on both of them and their works that we could write about. Do you prefer one over the other? I'm definitely fine with either - both seem very interesting. Haylee.schumacher (talk) 16:26, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

Sorry for taking so long to respond guys! I think that both George Estabrooks and Nancy Bayley are great candidates for a psychologist that we could do this project on. After reading up Jack L. I think this would be beyond interesting to dig into this topic, but like you said Haylee we would for sure have to check to see if there is enough information. When I read about George E. I think I found the work he does a little more interesting overall and it would be super fun to learn more about, but Nancy B. also has a lot of good information behind her career/life that I think we could expand upon on Wiki. It may also be easier to find information regarding a developmental perspective? Cassiehoffman (talk) 14:58, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Great choices!
Hi Group 7,

Bayley and Estabrooks are both great topics. I would encourage you to go with Bayley, for these reasons: J.R. Council (talk) 01:44, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
 * 1) The Bayley Scales of Infant Development is a very significant psychological test, and one of the few measures of abilities in infancy.
 * 2) Coverage of important women on Wikipedia needs to be improved. Disproportionate space devoted to males and male interests is a problem that is vexing Wikipedia. An article on Bayley will do something about that.

Illustrating Wikipedia
Hi Haylee, I got your question on my talk page. This is a common problem, and I need to get more information about that image. I will also let Ian, our content expert at Wiki Ed know. Perhaps he'll have some ideas. It may end up that you can't use that image, but we'll see. J.R. Council (talk) 19:26, 2 November 2015 (UTC)