User talk:Xyzbb1253

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

Feedback on 4 edits[edit]

I have no feedback on your edits. As I said, no feedback = A+ Dr Ashton (talk) 18:38, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

What you might do in I/O[edit]

The article on work design needs a lot of work. There's few references, and major work is not covered, like Hackman & Oldham's job characteristics theory. I'm putting this here because the talk page for the I/O article has been very contentious. Psyc12 (talk) 01:13, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Funny you should point out that article a friend of mine edited it about a year ago, well I'll take a look at make a few edits to page. Thank you Xyzbb1253 (talk) 03:29, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Abstract Feedback[edit]

It looks great, interesting/catchy title! --KierraA. (talk) 14:21, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Abstract Feedback[edit]

Yea, I agree with Kierra, it look great. It is will work. Thank You. (Devika Singh (talk) 15:41, 27 February 2014 (UTC))

Abstract Feedback[edit]

The objective has already been mentioned in a simple format and you have used verifiable and other terms such as primary and secondary terms which readers who are not familiar with Wikipedia may still understand. If I would add a few sentences I can definitely talk a little about what I/O psychology Example) applies psychological theories and principles to organizations. Often referred to as I/O psychology, this field focuses on increasing workplace productivity and related issues. And from that we can expand our objective within Wikipedia and then go on to explaining our goals for the study. Oplmnq3 (talk) 22:38, 27 February 2014 (UTC)


It looks good. I edited it and left some notes for you. Thanks for taking care of this!

Dr Ashton (talk) 14:11, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Science Leader![edit]

GD09 Poster Session.jpg Leadership on a Research Poster
Thank you for taking the lead with the poster abstract! Dr Ashton (talk) 15:13, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

week 6[edit]

What citations does it still need? The assignment was to take care of the tag (so the tag can be removed).

Dr Ashton (talk) 22:54, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Industrial & Organizational Assessment[edit]

Hey Team hope everyone is having a productive weekend!

Let us begin with a couple of terms we should definitely cite, "Psychological Testing" and "Work Sampling" should be cited which I have done It is one of the tools for individual assessments. I have also noticed that the article is still written in a opinionated matter. The improvements can be made but therefore we should all be more careful on certain words to be used that may prevent the article to be continued to be written in this format. Including the main definition of Industrial/Organizational Assessment the two quotes are used to define a term, lets simplify the quote paraphrase it to a solid meaning and just cite the quote. What do you think? Oplmnq3 (talk) 00:33, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Minor Barnstar Hires.png The Minor barnstar
A barnstar for your links to the I&O Assessment page! Dr Ashton (talk) 21:06, 10 March 2014 (UTC)


Now reviewing the link; Individual Assessment looks like a good title in replacement of Industrial & Organizational Assessment 

--KierraA. (talk) 16:35, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

team effectiveness[edit]

Is this page your stub?

Dr Ashton (talk) 21:29, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

team effectiveness[edit]

Yes you can do this Dr Ashton (talk) 16:28, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

re:assignment for inclusion criteria[edit]

Okay, it looks good to me Dr Ashton (talk) 13:37, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Team effectiveness[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Team effectiveness you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cirt -- Cirt (talk) 20:42, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Team effectiveness/GA1[edit]

Please see comments awaiting your response, at Talk:Team effectiveness/GA1. — Cirt (talk) 00:43, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Team effectiveness[edit]

The article Team effectiveness you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Team effectiveness for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cirt -- Cirt (talk) 00:02, 15 October 2014 (UTC)