User talk:Whicky1978

Standard welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Whicky1978, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! whicky1978^talk 23:54, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiagraphy

Referring to your comment on the Village Pump: Exactly what kind of people you mean who you need to look up? Famous or notorious people qualify for at least a short biography article in WP. -Skysmith 11:40, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Many people who are just associated with or related to famous or notorious people do not necessarily need articles, if that's the only thing they are famous about (and there are truckloads of people who just claim have known someone). Some could be included as members of some social groups, others mentioned in articles that refer to their specialty.
You mention that "Joe Schmo's" could try to include themselves (and actually they already do, see Votes for Deletion and its archives) but that is hardly the worst thing. I wrote a longer text about the possible pitfalls when one guy requested "Wikimanity" (of all humanity) but it seems to be too deep in the archives right now (ie. cannot find it). Shortly: listing too many so-called "ordinary" people could lead to multiple privacy violations, attempted character assassinations and potential for imposture and fraud. And that would not require they would be included in bad faith. - Skysmith 12:18, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Help Desk

I have responded to your help desk question (on the help desk). In addition, your "You have new messages" bar should have come on (see help desk response)! Thanks. Flcelloguy Give me a note! Desk 22:35, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[[User:Whicky1978|whicky1978 my talk]] 22:45, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)

Getting Psychotherapy into This Week's Improvement Drive

Hi there! I noticed that at one time or another you helped contribute to the article on Psychotherapy. As it stands this article could use a lot of help, and thus I've taken the liberty of trying to get it to be the focus of a week's improvement drive. All we need to get it for a week's worth of focus and improvement is enough votes, so go to Psychotherapy's vote page and help out this very needing article! JoeSmack (talk) 18:16, July 25, 2005 (UTC)

Psychotherapy

You have previously voted for Psychotherapy on WP:IDRIVE. It did not make it, but I have renominated it on the new Wikipedia:Medicine Collaboration of the Week. Please add your supporting vote there if you are still interested.--Fenice 21:14, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

School Counseling

I will do my best to help over the next period of time, although I am a bit biased towards the Developmental Model of School Counseling. I will try to not bend things with this bias. Kukini 08:00, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures

Before I arbitrarily revert your near-complete blanking of Talk:New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures, I'd like to give you the opportunity to offer an explanation. I cannot think of a good reason to do so, but perhaps you have one. - CobaltBlueTony 19:52, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

School counselor and release version

Sorry, this article seems fine, but I'm not sure the topic falls within the scope of 0.5. We expect to include only about 2,000 articles. Maurreen 15:19, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is just my opinion, but I don't think "School counselor" is of wide enough interest. Maurreen 11:00, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Google test, although imperfect, is a rough indicator of interest. "School counselor" gets 4 million Google hits.

Aquarium will be excluded, and it got 72 million hits. Also Punk rock, with 26 million hits, and Actuary with 6.7 million. Maurreen 12:39, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I don't know. Hasn't been decided yet. Maurreen 14:44, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jesse B. Davis

Hi, I deleted the article, since as it was written it met the criteria for speedy deletion. If you plan to write a more complete and well-sourced article I would encourage you to do so, but I'd advise you to make sure the article is reasonably complete before you create it. A good way to do this is to build it in your user-space first. This means you create an article called something like User:Whicky1978/Jesse B. Davis, work on the article there and when you are hapy with it, copy it to Jesse B. Davis. Good luck, Gwernol 15:06, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Again, Wikipedia has guidelines on notability. Your stub didn't meet those criteria. However, that does not mean that a notable article on Jesse Davis couldn't be written. By the way, the argument "there are other poor articles on Wikipedia, so don't delete my poor article" is almost never convincing. I'd encourage you to look at examples of good biographical articles and concentrate your efforts on following those examples to create a useful article on Jesse. Best, Gwernol 16:16, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently created the article Jesse B. Davis. This was deleted in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policies. Please do not recreate the article: if you disagree with the article's deletion, you may ask for a review at Wikipedia:Deletion review. Sorry :-( אמר Steve Caruso_(desk/poll) 19:30, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

References for Educational psychology

Hi, and thanks for your offer to help with the article. The references are currently in APA style (American Psychological Association) which is the standard for this discipline. But I think a compromise between APA and footnote style would be appropriate for this article. I've seen it used elsewhere in WP. The idea would be to keep pure APA style for the reference list with the exceptions that each entry would be prefixed by a footnote number and the entries would be ordered according to their order of appearance in the article instead of alphabetical order. The citations appearing within the text of the article would be in regular linked, superscript footnote style. Actually, I was planning to survey a few featured articles to decide on the best format, but if you are willing to make the changes, please go ahead. Nesbit 17:35, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The psychotherapy article you found seems like a pretty good model, although its individual reference entries are not pure APA style in a few spots. Nesbit 18:14, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I like the numbering style on school counselor. Feel free to do the same in educational psychology if you like. Thanks. Nesbit 18:17, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

re: Jesse B. Davis

I think that would be a much more viable stub. It still may deserve discussion and editing but that's true for every article on the project. I've taken the liberty of moving that content to a sub-page of your userspace for now. See user:Whicky1978/temp. We should probably wait for the Deletion Review discussion to conclude before recreating the page again in the main articlespace. Frequent recreations before the discussion concludes are often seen as a sign of bad-faith. If in 5-10 days the DRV discussion concludes with an "overturn" decision, you can move your draft out to the articlespace then. Rossami (talk) 06:20, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. I had the link above wrong before. Forgot to type the "user:" part of the link. Now fixed.

re: your recent comment on my userpage that the first version was "at face value notable". I would encourage you to spend a few months on the New Pages patrol before passing judgment on the actions of the people who saw the early drafts of your page. We get lots of outrageous claims made about non-notable people. For some reason, we seem to get a lot of such articles about teachers and others associated with secondary schools. The first versions of your draft did not establish context in time. My initial assumption was that the article was a "fluff piece" about a living person. It took some real research to disprove that hypothesis. It would be nice if we could always assume good faith but ... Well, as I said, spend some time on the New Pages patrol. I think you'll have a different perspective on the problem. I'm not saying that false positives are ever a good thing but they become a more understandable thing. Rossami (talk) 17:31, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

U.S. Labor stats for educational psychologists

Hi Whicky1978: Can you point me to the source of this statement in the educational psychology article: "Employment for psychologists is expected to grow faster than average (18-26%) for all occupations through the year 2014." With a terminal year of 2014 it must come from US labor stats, but I can't find it in the U.S. Gov. web page we cite for salary stats. Thanks. Nesbit 23:38, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Cherokee language wikipedia

<<< I think a Cherokee language wikipedia would be cool, but I don't know if it would be necessary since all Cherokee Americans speak English also, right?whicky1978 talk 22:59, 23 July 2006 (UTC) >>>

Hey...Cherokee American is my title :-D It isn't truly necessary, but the Cherokee language is in a period of revival in Oklahoma, U.S. Wikipedia has several "extinct" or not widely used language editions. Examples are Latin, Esperanto, Manx from the Isle of Man, Buganda, Papiamento, Ruthenian and hundreds of dialects not often written in encyclopedias. Be in mind the Cherokee syllabary is one of a few American Indian alphabets, invented by Sequoyah, a Cherokee scholar in the 1820's. Other Native American languages known to still thrive are Navajo, Comanche, Lakota, Cree, Haida and Yupik, although most young Native Americans speak English as a result of cultural dominance of the U.S. for two centuries. --Mike D 26 20:34, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

School counselor

Hi,

Yes, I can understand your problem. I'm a chemist, but I had a go at improving the article on the Humanities - I was frustrated to find that all the books in our college library (in the US) gave only the American perspective. Six months later, the article still has a {{limitedgeographicscope}} tag on it, which I didn't place there! I wonder if you can put in a request for translation for fr:Conseiller d'orientation? As for the UK or Australia, I would say that even if there are separate people covering academic advising and career advising, that sort of difference needs to be noted in this article. Also, you may be surprised - now the page is a GA and prominent (#20 in a Google search), people from overseas will begin to see it more and comment. Good luck with that, and if we can get at least one other perspective covered thoroughly I'll be sure to add in the article. Thanks for trying! Walkerma 03:49, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sweet tea

I was probably a little too happy when I saw the sweet tea userbox on your page, haha. I LOVE sweet tea, which is a problem since I live in Philadelphia and can really only get it one or two places, aside from making it myself. I guess this message isn't too terribly legitimate -- I just couldn;t resist. So I'll end by saying I hope you're having a good day. -FateSmiled&DestinyLaughed 14:37, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rating the ToK

Hi. I'm trying to get members of the Psychology Project to get together and rate the both the quality and importance of the Tree of Knowledge System. Hope you're interested. Have a great day! EPM 19:17, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Request for peer review

The article Clinical psychology has just been listed for peer review. You are invited to lend your editing eyes to see if it needs any modifications, great or small, before it is submitted to the Featured Article review. Then head on over to the peer review page and add your comments, if you are so inspired. Thank you!! Psykhosis 20:25, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Survey Invitation

Hi there, I am a research student from the National University of Singapore and I wish to invite you to do an online survey about Wikipedia. To compensate you for your time, I am offering a reward of USD$10, either to you or as a donation to the Wikimedia Foundation. For more information, please go to the research home page. Thank you. --WikiInquirer 03:48, 17 March 2007 (UTC)^{talk to me}[reply]

Ian wolfe

Please do not remove speedy deletion tags from articles. If you do not believe the article deserves to be deleted, then please do the following:

Place {{hangon}} on the page. Please do not remove any existing speedy deletion tag(s).
Make your case on the article's talk page.

Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you. JuJube 00:21, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

University of Saskatchewan

Noticed you were a member of Wikiproject Canada - Education.... Celebrate the Centennial University of Saskatchewan Anniversary in the year 2007. Would you please go to Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive and vote for this University of Saskatchewan article!!! Tell any and all other editors / U of S students you know who wiki to vote also please!!! Please help Celebrate the Anniversary of the U of S University of Saskatchewan Academics Talk Please help to bring the article to feature status !!!SriMesh | talk 02:55, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrectly rating Frank Parsons as GA standard

Please do not rate an article GA if it has not undergone a review by at least 1 editor through the GA nominations process. GA is not a rating anyone should give to any article. Tne rating should reflect articles of quality and not stubs or articles in early stages of development. Thanks. Bungle ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:41, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Frank Parsons is a complete article. whicky1978^talk 02:05, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think you quite understand. To give a GA tag, the article MUST be nominated and approved by an experienced editor before a GA status can be given. It might be "complete" in its content, but other factors such as layout, prose etc must obide by standards to a sufficient standard to be awarded the GA status. Please do not add this unless it has been approved by an experienced editor via the GA nominations process. Bungle ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:01, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Template:User Elementary

A tag has been placed on Template:User Elementary requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 22:34, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Invite

Hi Whicky1978!

I noticed you were a member of WikiProject Education, and thought you might be interested in WikiProject Homeschooling. In this "WikiProject," we have been together working on the collaboration of Homeschooling-related articles. As a member, I really hope you can join, and let me know if you need any help signing up or with anything else. If you have any questions about the project you can ask at the project's talk page. Cheers! RC-0722 ^communicator/_kills 23:14, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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) 22:05, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NowCommons: File:Chopin1.jpg

File:Chopin1.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Kate Chopin.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:Kate Chopin.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 15:06, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Who's Missing (game)

I have nominated Who's Missing (game), an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Who's Missing (game). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. SchuminWeb (Talk) 04:45, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:SnakeByWhicky1978.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:SnakeByWhicky1978.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 08:35, 20 March 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. IngerAlHaosului (talk) 08:35, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:SnakeByWhicky1978.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:SnakeByWhicky1978.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. IngerAlHaosului (talk) 08:35, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:58, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Social science education

The article Social science education has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Article borders on the fatuous. Social science is well developed. This has nothing to contribute.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Tagishsimon (talk) 17:18, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Whicky1978. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Allison Mack

Hi. Please do not add uncited material to articles, as you did with this edit to Allison Mack, as this violates Wikipedia's Verifiability policy.

Also, this website, which you cited to support the material you added in this edit, does not conform to Wikipedia policy. For one thing, there is no way to know if the Allison Mack named in those search results is the subject of the Wikipedia article. In addition, when citing a website, it shouldn't be a search engine, but the page that contains the information in question, where applicable. Lastly, WP:BLPPRIMARY prohibits us from using things like trial transcripts, court records, or other public documents to support assertions about a living person.

Since where an accused person is imprisoned changes between their arrest, trial and/or post-conviction imprisonment, where they're currently incarcerated is not really relevant anyway, per WP:NOTNEWS.

Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 02:29, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Whicky1978. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]