User talk:Margaret Cookson

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Currently, the Wikipedia encoding specificity principle page does not adequately address the intricacies of the topic. We will add many subsections to the page, including basic methods, specific results, and theory, to improve the article's clarity. We will also include references to the Thompson and Tulving experiment, the first investigation to demonstrate the encoding specificity principle; many other successive studies were based off of this experiement. Currently, the Wikipedia page has no citations. We plan on citing several different experiments to further explain the principle. Examples of how the encoding specificity principle applies to every-day life will make it desirable to many audiences. Furthermore, we plan on contextualizing other areas of memory study - including availability and accessibility - to increase the article's detail. From initial research, we have deduced the encoding specificity principle is connected to semantics, an area we plan to expand upon.

Hi. Margaret Cookson (talk) 18:11, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Teamwork at its best!!! SarahMDavis (talk) 18:12, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

YEEEEEEEE BOIIIIIIIIIIIIII DrewBlundell (talk) 18:15, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

User page feedback[edit]

See if you can make the external link prettier (not just the url) Greta Munger (talk) 17:32, 6 September 2011 (UTC)


Hi Margaret!

I have put together a survey for female editors of Wikipedia (and related projects) in order to explore, in greater detail, women's experiences and roles within the Wikimedia movement. It'd be wonderful if you could participate!

It's an independent survey, done by me, as a fellow volunteer Wikimedian. It is not being done on behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation. I hope you'll participate!

Just click this link to participate in this survey, via Google!

Any questions or concerns, feel free to email me or stop by my user talk page. Also, feel free to share this any other female Wikimedians you may know. It is in English, but any language Wikimedia participants are encouraged to participate. I appreciate your contributions - to the survey and to Wikipedia! Thank you! SarahStierch (talk) 21:57, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

flexibility (personality)[edit]

Sorry to interfere with this assignment but there are fundamental questions to be asked. It looks to me like flexibility (personality) was created by somebody who didn't realise that cognitive flexibility already existed. There is no point in doing this assignment just for the sake of it. Cognitive flexibility is of a high standard (good article status) and was part of an educational assignment. Before doing work on flexibility (personality) there needs to be an assessment as to whether flexibility (personality) needs to exist at all. If there is ground not covered by cognitive flexibility the answer may be to diversify it as a single article rather than have two articles and this may not be a good use of a students time working on an article that is already of a high standard. One poorly developed article that your group might like to look at at some point is attention seeking.--Penbat (talk) 08:12, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 10[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mirrored-self misidentification, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Anterior horn (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) 08:52, 10 May 2014 (UTC)