User talk:Js7581

Welcome!

Welcome to Wikipedia, Js7581! Thank you for your contributions. I am Iryna Harpy and I have been editing Wikipedia for some time, so if you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Wikipedia:Questions or type {{help me}} at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Iryna Harpy (talk) 00:17, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This user is a student editor in Memorial_University/Animal_Behaviour_(Winter) .

Hello @Iryna Harpy: and thank you again for the warm welcome! I appreciate your offer of assistance and I will likely be contacting you as I work towards editing stub articles related to Animal Behaviour over the next semester. Cheers. Js7581 (talk) 01:02, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. If you feel confident about changes to content, be WP:BOLD in making them. If you want to consult/converse on particular articles/stubs, you can WP:PING me directly from the talk page of the relevant article. You'll soon get a sense of whether other editors are still actively maintaining articles, or whether they've been left floating in cyberspace and are in need of some TLC. I can't recall any significant activity on behavioural sciences articles for a while, so renewed interest is greatly appreciated. Looking forward to lending a hand once you're on track for time. Happy New Year! --Iryna Harpy (talk) 18:58, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Js7581, 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 check out the student training library, 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.

Handouts
Choosing an article to edit Editing an article • Add images to articles Citing sources on Wikipedia
Additional Resources
You can find answers to many student questions on our Q&A site, ask.wikiedu.org

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 17:42, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback

Nice work - interesting topic! The only major change I'd make is to the opening paragraph. Wikipedia articles are supposed to have lead sections that summarise the content of the article body. Right now, you mention that the hypothesis was proposed by Peter Ward and Amotz Zahavi in the lead, but you don't repeat this in the body. It's a small thing, but it might be helpful pretend that the article could be read without the lead, and make sure that everything important is also in the body. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:33, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

   Thanks so much for the help and advice Ian (Wiki Ed)! I will definitely make those changes! Js7581 (talk) 16:09, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Information centre hypothesis moved, and feedback

Per your request at Ian's talk page your article can now be found here. (Another option, if Ian prefers, would be to move your article to Draft space.)

I also created an associated talk page for you; just go to the link, and click the "Talk" tab at the top. I left you some feedback on the Talk page on how to improve the article. Also, if you ask other editors for feedback, please point them to that talk page, and ask them to contribute there. If wish to respond to me below, please indent your reply, and {{ping}} me to get my attention. Mathglot (talk) 01:32, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It looks pretty good. One way you could improve things is to turn your examples around a bit so that they start by talking about the findings, rather than the study. In academic writing we like to start with who did what before we get to the findings, but it's better in Wikipedia (better in general, to be honest) to focus on the good stuff first. If you don't catch their attention early on, people stop reading. For example, in your hooded crows section, I've bolded the good stuff:

The information centre hypothesis has been studied in hooded crows (Corvus cornix). Hooded crows exhibit communal roosting behaviour and often feed in flocks, making them a good candidate species for studies of the information centre hypothesis.^[1] A study conducted by Sonerud, Smedshaug, and Brathen (2001) examined the roost and feeding behaviours of 34 hooded crows over three years, with results supporting the information centre hypothesis.^[1] Sonerud et al. created an environment with unpredictable and ephemeral food sources, similar to the natural environment in which the crows live.^[1] The study differentiated between 'leader' crows who were knowledgeable about the food site from Day 1, as well as 'followers,' who roosted overnight with leaders, and 'naive' crows who did not roost overnight with a leader or visit the food site on Day 1.^[1] Notably, they found that compared to naive individuals, follower crows which had not visited the food patch on Day 1 were significantly more likely to visit the patch on Day 2 if they roosted overnight with a leader crow familiar with the food patch, but only if the leader crow returned on Day 2 as well.^[1] This indicated that the crows who were unfamiliar with the food patch received information from the leader crows regarding their foraging success, and then followed them to the location the following day^[1]. This is supported when compared to the naive individuals who did not roost overnight with the leader, and had significantly lower levels of finding the food source on Day 2.^[1]

References

^ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f ^g Cite error: The named reference :4 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

If you start with that kind of information, people have the good stuff right away, and they're more likely to keep reading. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 14:01, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keeping a sandbox copy of an already moved article

Js7581, I noticed that you copied the content of your article back to the sandbox again, after it was spun off from the sandbox.

After I moved the article content out of your sandbox (per your request) I deleted the original sandbox copy and linked from there to the new space.^[a]

Afterward, you copied the content back, with the summary, "Kept copy of article in sandbox as per DrW." (You also removed the link I added pointing to the new article; which makes it harder for other interested editors to follow what happened here.) One question is who, or what, is "DrW"? If it's a "who", can you please add a link below where they told you to do that?

Secondly: pasting the content back results in having two copies of it that might be updated independently and diverge. That may be problematic; there may be a guideline about this, but I couldn't find it; closest I could find is this WP Training page on Sandbox edits for existing articles. Not sure if the paste should be reverted or not; paging Ian (and Shalor) for assistance. If a history merge needs to be done, see WP:HISTMERGE for details (that's something to leave for an admin or experienced user, though). Mathglot (talk) 06:28, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Notes

^ I used a less than ideal, cut-paste move because your sandbox had pieces of other articles in it, and a straight move wasn't practical at the time, although this raises some attribution issues that never got resolved; see WP:HISTMERGE.

I'm guessing this is for grading purposes. Js7581, you can always point your instructor to a specific diff (a specific version of the article in the article history) that avoids this duplication. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:03, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Ian, Mathglot! Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 21:50, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[:4-1] ^ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f ^g Cite error: The named reference :4 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

[2] I used a less than ideal, cut-paste move because your sandbox had pieces of other articles in it, and a straight move wasn't practical at the time, although this raises some attribution issues that never got resolved; see WP:HISTMERGE.

[1]

[a]