Welcome

Happiness? It is a very subjective feeling. No matter what you "wear" people can see it in you, but only you know how it really feels. Therefore, I think the quote is very accurate. Kasob (talk) 03:13, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Class Project

I agree that the biography pages are probably less ideal for the class project. (There would be some interesting ways to integrate personality psychology in this kind of thing, but not that would fit Wikipedia well.) Of the remaining topics, I think any could work well as your primary project. A few thoughts on them: The halo effect is more about person perception that actual personality, but this is close enough. The agreeableness page is currently quite limited. Lots of room to improve this. The evolutionary psych & religion page might potentially become controversial or stir up argument with other editors, though I see no evidence that this has happened in the past. I'm also not sure how much empirical work you will find that addresses this issue, but could easily image that it would be plenty. (Moreover, focusing on theory here would be OK too as long as you found enough.) The somatotype topic seems interesting but might also be somewhat limited in scope (I'm not sure). You could also pursue the idea of more modern approaches, e.g., the idea that physically strong people might adopt a more aggressive personality because of their body type. Anyway, you seem to be on the right track with these. The next step is to choose one (or more) and develop a plan for edits to ensure there will be enough there for the project. --Jayzzee (talk) 02:09, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Editing

Hi Matthew: I found your proposed articels interesting, so I "signed up" in the class table to edit them. I remember that in the last class of February 10, it was mentioned that we could start adding our names into the table. Maybe we could talk in class sometime to ensure that you will want me as an editor. Good luck with the writing.Owleye769 (talk) 22:13, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Please be advised that my page is not finished. I will let you know when it is ok to edit it. Also, the link to my updates located on the class wikipedia page does not work well, so in order to have the latest version of the page, go to Search and type: Extraversion and Introversion. The section I am working on is called: Extraversion, introversion, and happiness. Thanks, (Kasob (talk) 16:06, 17 March 2012 (UTC))[reply]

Hi Matthew. Thanks for agreeing to edit my article. Recently, a wikipedia user deleted about 40% of the content from my article which severely reduced the content pertaining to psychology. Also, an editor has made the content more technical and therefore maybe less relevant for a general Wikipedia readership. So, I have posted some "talk" on my article's talk page about possibly restoring the deletions and reversing some edits. So, please don't make any edits/corrections over the next few days - as the content may change substantially over the next few days(as I may reverse some of the edits). So, I don't want you to waste your time on drafts that might change. Hope this all makes sense.Owleye769 (talk) 21:04, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again: I just read the agreeableness article and found it interesting especially regarding the sub-traits/facets. Just wanted to check if you were ready for me to start editing. I am wondering if you could leave a message (or send an email via WebCT) when you would like me to start editing - and also on which article. Thanks and good luck with the rest of the course.Owleye769 (talk) 12:36, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Matthew: Thanks for the update. I will let you know when I have the deletions restored so that others can edit. I think WIKI guidelines allow for 3 undos/reversals of deletions per 24 hours. I had many deletions, so the process will take a few days. Thanks for your patience and good luck with the rest of the assignment.Owleye769 (talk) 03:36, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Matthew: Thanks for offering to review my wiki stub (Affective Events Theory). It's a work in progress and any feedback you can provide would be greatly appreciated. 15015OakBriar (talk) 19:04, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Matthew: Thanks for your response. I originally created this article as "epigenetics and behaviour" but think that "epigenetics in psychology" might be more appropriate, not "epigenetics and personality" as you mentioned. I, too, think that "epigenetics and personality" is a stretch. Sorry if I mixed up any terminology. Owleye769 (talk) 23:42, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Did a little more editing today and made only very minor changes on the first third or so of the article. The writing is very strong in terms of structure and content. Also, sentence and paragraph structures are very strong. As a result, could only find some negligable items to edit. I did have a question about the "independently developed" under "The Big Five" section. Did each researcher work independently (i.e, by themself - yet they may or may not have known about other similar research going on in the field at the same time) - or did they develop something new or come to the same conclusions, independent of each other (i.e., with every researcher not knowing about any of the other researchers' similar works)? I will look at the rest of the article soon.Owleye769 (talk) 06:16, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for your edits and recommendations, Matthew. Much appreciated. I will go through a make the changes suggested and update the reference list to include the citiations needed. Again, very thorough job of editting that will make the page even better! 15015OakBriar (talk) 15:04, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Matthew. I have the majority of my article completed and ready to be looked at.Owleye769 (talk) 19:30, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Matthew:Got your message. No problem as I am in no rush. Forgot to mention that I plan to add a Limitations and Future Research section that will include criticism to my article.Owleye769 (talk) 20:51, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Update Hi Matthew. Thanks for your edits and suggestions. I have some sections that repeat, but my goal was to have "stand-alone" sections. I added a "Limitations and future research" section today. I do not plan to add much to the content after today. I would be interested in borrowing your "Plausibility of Life" book, as well. Let me know when you are ready to have your articles looked at again.Owleye769 (talk) 00:33, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Matthew: Thanks again for your suggestions. I incorporated all of them into the article. As well, Great Thanks for your edits as they really strengthened.Owleye769 (talk) 13:54, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lexical hypothesis editing

Just read the Lexical hypothesis article. Is a great read. I just made some minor edits regarding a few typos and long/run-on sentences. I also added a couple of wiki-format page number quotes. Also from what I have seen in Wiki formatting, only the first letter of a heading/sub-heading should be capitalized. e.g., "Early Estimates" according to Wiki should be "Early estimates." I did not change any of these capital letters - as I did not know if you have a certain stylistic approach in mind.

Also, for example, "Baumgarten identified 1,093 separate terms in the German language used in the description personality and mental states." When using terms, I assume that individual words are implied, as terms can also be phrases. Maybe would want to qualify.
Under Criticism: "The methods used to test the Lexical Hypothesis are unscientific" - was wondering how they are unscientific? Also, have my own notion of what is meant by "The mechanisms that led to the development of personality lexicons are poorly understood" - but maybe consider adding one additional sentence to qualify.

Overall, I thought the article was tremendously well-written.Owleye769 (talk) 23:08, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Facet (psychology) editing

Again, a great article. Only made a few minor corrections and tightened one or two sentences.Owleye769 (talk) 23:27, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I wanted to let you know that User:Armsbf11 from the Wikipedia:United States Education Program/Courses/Personality (William Fleeson) course has selected a very similar topic to Facet (psychology). Would you be willing to collaborate with them on the article?Smallman12q (talk) 01:30, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Facet (psychology)

On 2 May 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Facet (psychology), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that each of the Big Five personality traits can be further broken down into six facets? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Facet (psychology).You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 08:04, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Education Program Student Survey

Hi! Please take a few minutes to fill out this survey about the Wikipedia Education Program. This is our opportunity to improve the program and resources we provide students, so your feedback and input is integral to our future success. Thank you so much! JMathewson (WMF) (talk) 00:00, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Call for Carleton University's Campus Ambassador

Hello,

My name is Andrew. I'm the Regional Ambassador for the Canada Education Program. The goal of this program is to engage students and professors in using Wikipedia as a teaching tool. A professor from Carleton University, which you indicated your affiliation with the university through your userbox, is participating in the program for Fall 2012 semester. We're seeking campus ambassadors, which we currently don't have for Carleton University, who are available on-campus to help students. If you're interested (or have any other questions), please leave a message on my talk page. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 04:53, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Change in your user rights

Your Wikipedia account was previously granted a user right called "course instructor" by the Wiki Education Foundation. That right enabled you to create a course page through the EducationProgram MediaWiki extension. Starting in fall 2015, the Wiki Education Foundation has discontinued its use of this extension. Going forward, users should create course pages through the Wiki Education Foundation website. That application is more user-friendly, and any content is automatically mirrored to Wikipedia. To prevent confusion, we'll be removing your "course instructor" user right, as it is not needed with the new system. This is simply a notification of the technical change to your account. No action is needed from you at this time.

If you plan on teaching with Wikipedia for the fall 2015 term, please email me (helainewikiedu.org) for instructions how to create your next course page using our new system. --Helaine (Wiki Ed) (talk), sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:34, 21 July 2015 (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) 16:52, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Matthew.murdoch. 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]