User talk:Marentette/Archive 1

Hi Paula,

When more than one person is editing at one time and I try to save it comes up with a message. I don't think I'm deleting anyone else's stuff...but I'm not sure...

LianneAnna (talk) 22:27, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

I will be teaching Psychology of Language (AUPSY373) Fall 2011. One assignment is to edit Wikipedia articles in the area, with a particular focus on reading.

Here is a list of articles that I think students should consider editing.

Psycholinguistics

Reading (process)

Learning to read

Lexical decision task

Eye movement in language reading

McGurk effect

Feel free to suggest others by editing this page.

Check this out! Psychology_of_Language9APSWI323

Marentette (talk) 20:48, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Some stroopwafels for you!
Paula,

I was hoping to add more information about the different types of Dysgraphia, symptoms, school aid, and what the cause of Dysgraphia is. I am not limiting myself to those topics, but I feel they are the most important aspects of the page at this point in time. If you have any other suggestions please let me know.

Thanks,

Hayley Hkyoung01 (talk) 03:08, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi Paula,

Sara and I are planning on working on the Learning to read article. We are going to be sitting down tonight to determine which sections each will do and after we decide we will let you know.

Thanks, Amanda Alk4hgirl (talk) 21:19, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi Paula, I just read your message. Thank you very much. Julietbee (talk) 21:33, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

And I will be working on the "Eye movement in language reading" article. Thanks. Julietbee (talk) 21:45, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi Paula,

I thought that I would let you know that we have posted on the learning to read discussion page the ideas that we have for improving the page.

Thanks Alk4hgirl (talk) 22:19, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi Paula, Sorry I forgot to sign up for my chosen article on the course page.

Julietbee (talk) 05:21, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi Paula, Thank you for the feedback. Part of the reason a lot of the article has been changed is because there are no references in the old work, and I did not necessarily find other work to support it. I am working on the integration of the "old page" and the page I will be posting, but I have to make sure I have the references for it. I think you can only see the references if I post the article to public view... Thanks again,

Hkyoung01 (talk) 22:55, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello Paula, Thanks for the comments. 142.59.177.37 (talk) 06:10, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello Paula, I am working on my article in my sandbox, but I don't see the "cite" icon to allow me add more citations. Could you please tell me what I may be doing wrong? Thanks.

Julietbee (talk) 07:17, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi Paula,

I saw Jorden after class, and she thought firefox may also help solve the problem. So we downloaded firefox and it worked! I don't have any problem at the moment; thank God (and Jorden)!

Julietbee (talk) 21:26, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi Paula,

I was wondering how I would cite a website that is an organization, for example, http://www.dyslexia-ca.org/c-dysg.php in APA format?

Thank you, Hkyoung01 (talk) 22:10, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much Paula!

Julietbee (talk) 23:31, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi Paula,

I'm a bit confused. Are we modifying our chosen articles and submitting them to "Do you know," or we're supposed to submit what's in out sandbox? It probably sounds like a silly question, but please help me out. I tried submitting what's in my sandbox, but it's not possible, because I had to enter the title of an article to submit, which the original one appeared since it exist on wikipedia. Hope to hear from you soon.

142.59.177.37 (talk) 15:14, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Hello confused.

Since you didn't log on, or didn't sign your entry, I have no idea who this is.

I hope you find my response here as I've no idea how else to get in touch with you. You cannot submit anything from a sandbox. Follow the process for Did You Know submission. This requires that you modify the article substantially, as well as going to the DYK template to submit.

Paula Marentette (talk) 21:40, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi Paula, I'm that confused individual, who forgot to log on before sending you a message. I wasn't sure how to get my draft out of the sandbox, in order to submit it to DYK. But thanks to Nikkimaria, I've been able to submit my article. Thanks.

Julietbee (talk) 23:41, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi Paula! We were just going to summit our article for DYK, but we are very confused on how to do this. We were looking on the wiki DYK page and at templates, but didn't know where to go from there. Hope you can help us some. Thanks so much!

Alk4hgirl (talk) 04:55, 7 November 2011 (UTC) and sara

Good Article review
I have begun a review of Learning to read. Under the Good Article criteria, the article should be free of maintenance tags. The article currently has two. The first is Expert-subject added here. The second is Globalize in the "Skills required for proficient reading" section. It was added here. The tagger is supposed to leave a note on the talk page to explain why it was tagged as such, but didn't. I assume you, as the professor, would qualify as a subject matter expert. Please review the content and judge whether the tags are still relevant. If they are still warranted please leave me a note on the talk page explaining why. If they are no longer relevant, remove the tags. The article will not pass the review with such tags still present. Thanks. maclean (talk) 03:45, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

diagnosing dysgraphia
Hi Paula, I left you a response at the bottom of this page  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Dysgraphia#Dysgraphia_is_.28NOT.29_a_hard_disorder_to_detect   not sure if you were going to look there again, so thought I'd mention it here. I prefer to remain (reasonably) anonymous for reasons that should be self-evident. Thanks! 67.40.212.97 (talk) 19:25, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Language Acquisition
Here is the new course page. Language Acquisition


 * Greetings Paula. How lovely to discover that our interests overlap. My real syllabus for the course I'm connecting to Wikipedia often includes a paper by you and LP. It gets the students thinking about babbling much more abstractly. Cheero, Cecilemckee (talk) 00:05, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Ambassadors
Hi Dr. Marentette,

I notice that your Language Acquisition course has no online ambassadors listed. I have spent two semesters volunteering as an online ambassador for courses at other universities and I would be glad to volunteer with your course if you would like to make use of me. I am very interested in linguistics and would like to see Wikipedia's coverage of this subject improve. Please let me know if this proposal meets with your approval.

Neelix (talk) 17:57, 15 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Dr. Marentette,


 * Thank you for accepting me as an online ambassador for your course. It sounds as though you have given your students solid objectives and a well-thought-out process for achieving them. I look forward to working with you as well.


 * Neelix (talk) 21:14, 15 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Dr. Marentette,


 * I don't think it matters who does it, so I went ahead and added myself. Hopefully the link to my talk page there will encourage your students to contact me when they have Wikipedia-related questions.


 * Neelix (talk) 22:03, 15 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Dr. Marentette,


 * Thank you for keeping me informed! Does the phrase "word learning" specifically refer to the formation of an initial vocabulary in young children? If so, "Word learning" should be a section on the Vocabulary development article. When that section gets to the size that it should be on a fully developped Vocabulary development article, the section should be provided with a hatnote linking to a new article called Word learning that takes that section as its initial basis. The same is true of the Joint attention article; a "Humans" section can be created, which can eventually spawn a Human joint attention article. I like your suggestion of working in a sandbox before moving the article into the article space so as to have a better chance at a DYK. It is also a great idea to have the students perform as much of their discussion as possible on talk pages rather than verbally outside Wikipedia; this practice makes it so much easier for other users to understand why the article is the way it is. I hope this helps! Please let me know whenever I can be a resource for you or for your students.


 * Neelix (talk) 03:54, 7 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Dr. Marentette,


 * My recommendation is to choose a user-based sandbox and have all the students develop the article there. Sandboxes are the best place for this kind of work because they allow various users to reformulate the content of a future article (or future expansion) before the edits go live. In many cases, the edit histories can be preserved such that other users can see how the article developped. Talk pages are quite different. While sandboxes can be reformulated over and over by various editors, this kind of reformulation is prohibited on talk pages. Talk pages are for discussion of article content and format. For this reason, comments are listed chronologically and editors are not allowed to refactor the comments posted by other editors. Talk pages record the history of discussions regarding an article; for articles that are continuously discussed over time, these talk pages are archived so that all the discussions are accessible. You can read more about the purpose of talk pages here. As for achieving a DYK, the limit is five days in the article space, so development in the user space beforehand is fine. Also, the people over at DYK are generally fairly lenient with accepting submissions from students in the Global Education Program. I hope I have answered your questions. Feel free to contact me again if I have not or if you have any further questions.


 * Neelix (talk) 02:32, 10 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Dr. Marentette,


 * There is a way for administrators to merge the histories of different articles as outlined here. Being an administrator, I should be able to merge the histories of the article-space article and the sandbox article when it comes time for the students' edits to be transferred to the article space. Does this solution address your concerns? I would be glad to look for another solution with you if not.


 * Neelix (talk) 22:03, 16 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Dr. Marentette,


 * That plan works well for me; I'd be glad to move the articles to the article space in the time frame you have indicated. I hope your students will be successful in achieving DYKs!


 * Neelix (talk) 01:42, 9 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Dr. Marentette,


 * Martin Smith operates Citation bot, which I believe is set to automatically select articles to revise with respect to citations. I do not know if the bot can be manually directed to specific articles, but you can ask Martin on his talk page if you would like. I have fixed the dashes on the Joint attention article using a script, which is one of the main things that Citation bot does, but I don't have scripts to do other citation-related cleanup.


 * You can certainly create a redirect from Word learning to Vocabulary development. Just click on the "Word learning" red link in the first sentence of this paragraph and insert the text " #REDIRECT Vocabulary development ". Then, everyone who types "Word learning" into the search box will be redirected to the Vocabulary development article.


 * I highly recommend nominating the two articles for good article status. The articles may pass or they may not, but I think it's a valuable process and certainly a rewarding one if the articles pass. The good article criteria should give you a good overview of the kinds of things that reviewers will be looking for. You can look at the current good articles if you'd like to see some examples of articles that have succeeded in achieving good status. Augmentative and alternative communication and Object permanence are probably the best ones for comparison as their subject matter is similar and the articles achieved good article status only last year. You can also look at those articles' talk pages to see how the good article reviews proceeded. The students are certainly welcome to continue to edit the articles during the review process; indeed, they are encouraged to do so. Many articles that are not quite at good status when submitted for consideration pass because they improve sufficiently over the course of the review. Unfortunately, the good article review process varies significantly in how long it takes to complete, how thorough the review is, and how willing the reviewer is to wait for the recommended changes to be implemented. I hope that the process will go well for your students; they have done a great job with the articles and I would love to see them achieve good status.


 * Neelix (talk) 21:16, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Vocabulary development draft
Hi Paula,

I just wanted to let you know that I worked in my own sandbox. Please let Neelix know, so she can move mine to the article space as well. I'm trying to add my work to the draft of your page, but i'm not sure how. I'm still figuring out though. Thank!

Julietbee (talk) 16:44, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello Paula!

I actually figured out! I just added my draft to the vocab development draft sandbox on your page. Thanks!

Julietbee (talk) 17:17, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Paula,

I just spent the last half hour or so editing the Vocabulary development page and then realized I wasn't logged in. Just thought I'd let you know!Eheiberg (talk) 03:31, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Paula,

Just wanted to let you know (if you haven't yet noticed) that Mr. Stradivarius set up our references and the short footnotes for the vocabulary development page. This made it really easy to put page numbers in, so I did so for the books/articles in books that I used as references. I'm going to leave the others a message to let them know as well. Alindsay9 (talk) 15:11, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or  located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 02:47, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Joint attention
Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:03, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Joint attention has passed GA
Congratulations! You did a very good job. Hope this isn't too late to count for your course. (I apologize for taking so long.) Best wishes, MathewTownsend (talk) 17:59, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

A belated welcome!
Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Marentette. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia: Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.
 * Introduction
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * How to write a great article

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on, consult Questions, or place helpme on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 03:13, 1 August 2012 (UTC)