User talk:JTBurman

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, please be sure to sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes (&#126;&#126;&#126;&#126;) to produce your name and the current date, or three tildes (&#126;&#126;&#126;) for just your name. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! Hyacinth 15:13, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style
 * Merging, redirecting, and renaming pages
 * If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also Topical index.

Tony Burman

 * Hi there. Just as a heads up, you might want to have a look at our guideline on creating an article about yourself. There's nothing overly self-aggrandizing about the article Tony Burman, at least compared with some that we see here, and I'm only going by your user name to assume that it's about you. Ignorance ("I didn't know I wasn't supposed to do that") sometimes can be a good excuse. But you should at least be aware of that guideline in case anybody questions you about it. --OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 16:50, 22 December 2005 (UTC)


 * The article is not about me; we just have the same last name. The article is based on material found at cbc.ca, which was written and vetted by CBC staff.  I simply added relevant links to increase usability. --Jeremy - 10:16, 27 December 2005

Nepotism?
Are you related to Tony Burman, or is it just a co-incidence that you have the same last name as him?

--  Denelson83  17:56, 13 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, I am related to him. But I have no more power or influence than anyone in reporting what's publicly available information. I chose to use as transparent an ID as possible, given that I also do research in psychology and didn't want to mislead anyone when I added comments. JTBurman 22:30, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Tony Burman (again)
I've given the Tony Burman article a bit of a trim. There didn't seem any need to link to each of his weekly columns separately - one link (in the External Links section) probably suffices. Also, the section about CBC seemed out of place. The article is about Mr Burman, not his employers; all of that information is adequately covered in Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. --OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 15:26, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Tony Burman
Okay, done...the main thing is that while I know it's generally accepted as corporate/institutional style to capitalize job titles like "editor" or "president" in corporate communications, it's not actually standard English style, and Wikipedia follows the latter rules. Thanks for your help :-) Bearcat 03:06, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Burman conflict?
Hi - Given the similarity between your username and Tony Burman is there any conflict of interest WP:COI there? It does seem like a nice bio. Canuckle 23:26, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
 * As I pointed out in response to a similar question in 2005 (and following the WP:COI guidelines), I declared my potential conflict of interest in choosing to edit using my own name. But the bio isn't about me and everything there is properly referenced and fully verifiable; I've kept it up to date using only what's available in the public record.  When I might have made a controversial edit, say to the Virginia Tech massacre article (regarding the CBC's decision not to show the killer), I chose not to. I think I have been utterly spotless in my ethics, but am glad you reminded me that neutrality is so important.  And thanks for the compliment too, regarding the article's quality. JTBurman 01:38, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the response. I had looked at the older posts here but missed the most relevant ones. Canuckle 02:18, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

The Layne Morris interview
I was disappointed in the Layne Morris interview.

I have been following news reports about him for the last year or so. What I have found is that he is not an intellectually honest man:
 * 1) He implies he was wounded by the same grenade that mortally wounded Christopher Speer
 * 2) He has implied that he observed Khadr, and was in a position to judge whether he was a "highly trained killer".


 * 1) In fact Morris was wounded early in the skirmish, I believe he had already been evacuated before Speer was wounded.
 * 2) He has no idea if he was wounded by Omah Khadr, or by one of his comrades.
 * 3) I don't believe he ever had an opportunity observe Khadr and that all his comments about Khadr looking like a killer were based on photographs, same as all the rest of us. --  Geo Swan 04:43, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Layne Morris's credibility
I responded to your question on my talk page. You said you would tell the producers. Do you work for the CBC? -- Geo Swan 19:29, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Barnstar
Hi, great idea! I had thought of it like a year ago, but decided against it as there is a Barnstar of National Merit. However, it can be given for any country. -- Earl Andrew - talk 04:52, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

CanCon
Can anyone use your CanCon recognition symbol you created? WayneRay 14:13, 5 May 2006 (UTC)WayneRay
 * Of course! I had originally submitted it for consideration as a new barnstar, but the consensus was that the Barnstar of National Merit was sufficient.  If you would like to use it, please feel free.  JTBurman 06:50, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

copy editing Louis Braille
I've given a glance to your article, it seems fair, though I'll have to look closer on coming back tonight. I notice that the section headings are markedly different from their French originals, though. Is that voluntary? Also, when I've got a full critique ready, where do you want me to post it? Svartalf 09:54, 23 January 2006 (UTC)


 * You're right: I took some liberties with the section headings. The first was reflective of my intent to preserve what I perceived to be an intentional pun on doit/doigt by the original author, which then became "bump" in translation.  The third I assumed reflected an idiomatic usage, so I translated it using the equivalent English term: "consumption." --JTBurman 10:06, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Alright, critique posted. As expected, the only real beef I have is with your section titles, but my misgivings have been voiced, I won't launch an edit war if you decide to cling to them. everything there is to read is on the Louis Braille talk page --Svartalf 18:02, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Changes are here: IronDuke 16:25, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Ah. Can you tell me a bit more? (And where the translation is?) Thanks. IronDuke 17:04, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Vestiges
Glad you found it useful! Your information looks good too. I don't know much about the content of Vestiges but I've read up a bit on the history of its publication. I found the fact that it consistently out-sold Origin of Species until the 20th century quite fascinating! --Fastfission 04:09, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Kuhn
Hey JTBurman - nice to meet you. I finally got around to making that edit to the Thomas Samuel Kuhn page. It could benefit from a fresh pair of eyes, so please have a look. Always nice to meet a fellow Kuhn fan. Cheers. BFD1 19:51, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 22:08, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject History of Science newsletter : Issue IV - May 2008
A new May 2008 issue of the WikiProject History of Science newsletter is hot off the virtual presses. Please feel free to make corrections or add news about any project-related content you've been working on. You're receiving this because you are a participant in the History of Science WikiProject. You may read the newsletter or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Yours in discourse--ragesoss (talk) 23:47, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

DSM-IV Proposal
Would you consider adding any input to our proposal regarding the DSM-IV. Input is being collected on our talk page. Thanks! Mindsite (talk) 22:18, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject History of Science newsletter : Issue V - January 2009
It's here at long last! The January 2009 issue of the WikiProject History of Science newsletter is ready, with exciting news about Darwin Day 2009. Please feel free to make corrections or add news about any project-related content you've been working on. You're receiving this because you are a participant in the History of Science WikiProject. You may read the newsletter or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Yours in discourse --ragesoss (talk) 03:07, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello JTBurman! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 2 of the articles that you created  are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. 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 these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the list:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 23:44, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Paul Delouvrier -
 * 2) Hans van Manen -

Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference
Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to  in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and you will still be able to manually mark your edits as being 'minor'. The only thing that's changed is that you will no longer have them marked as minor by default.

For established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. If you are familiar with the contents of WP:MINOR, and believe that it is still beneficial to the encyclopedia to have all your edits marked as such by default, then this discussion will give you the details you need to continue with this functionality indefinitely. If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 18:36, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Ya. Hi. I made that edit because the previous version said that Kuhn said you can't compare. That's wrong. JTBurman (talk) 01:29, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Quebec City - Looking for help bringing this article to GA
Any help you could provide in bringing the Quebec City article to GA status would be greatly appreciated. Alan.ca (talk) 03:37, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

JT: Willing to help with some Wikipedia-related research?
Hi! I'm a first-year PhD student working on a system to help improve the quality of Wikipedia articles on scientific topics by providing easier access to relevant scientific publications. I was hoping to speak with some editors who work on scientific articles in order to solicit requirements for my system in order to better satisfy the needs of the Wikipedia community. I noticed that you have been a caretaker for a number of pages on psychology-related topics, and I would really appreciate your input. If you are interested, please let me know on my talk page (talk). Thanks! —Preceding undated comment added 23:24, 27 May 2011 (UTC).
 * Hi JT, thanks for posting on my page. I'm in my first year right now, so still feeling things out (no specific dissertation plans quite yet). Generally my work focuses on how to leverage information shared in online social systems, which explains my interest in Wikipedia. For a summary of this specific project, we are essentially hoping to build a dashboard that provides recommendations for articles relevant to a Wikipedia article both to help editors with editing and to give readers additional information sources for further reading. Our hope is that the recommendations will lead to better articles, which will lead to better recommendations, and so on. Any input you could provide will hopefully benefit the Wikipedia community as a whole, so I hope that you are able to find some time to help. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sanjaykairam (talk • contribs) 05:49, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Notification of automated file description generation
Your upload of File:Barnstar-CanCon.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 12:50, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 8
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Baldwin effect, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Paul Weiss (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 08:55, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 13
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.


 * York University
 * added links pointing to John O’Neill, Gareth Morgan, Gordon Shepherd, Nicholas Rogers and Stephen Gill

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:24, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:03, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!
Neat! Thanks!! I always wanted one. JTBurman (talk) 15:17, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Ways to improve History of Psychology (discipline)
Thanks for creating History of Psychology (discipline).

A New Page Patroller Rosguill just tagged the page as having some issues to fix, and wrote this note for you:

"The article needs some copy editing, and the lead should include a more complete summary of the article's content."

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can reply over here and ping me. Or, for broader editing help, you can talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

signed,Rosguill talk 21:34, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

January 2020
Hello, I'm SteveMcCluskey. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Scientific Revolution have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the help desk. As the hatnote to that article points out, this article is not about Kuhn's analysis of "process of scientific progress via revolutions," which is the basis for his discussion of incommensurability of scientific theories. SteveMcCluskey (talk) 20:34, 9 January 2020 (UTC)


 * I made this edit because what was on the page, and what you have reverted to, is incorrect. Because the sentence has Kuhn as its subject, being "not wrong" about what Kuhn said would be more encyclopedic. Marking it as vandalism, or experimentation, is an overreach. JTBurman (talk) 12:23, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello!
Thank you for your editing and looking forward to more improvements to history of psychology pages! Zeromonk (talk) 14:29, 3 May 2022 (UTC)