User talk:Poule

Welcome...

Hello, Poule, 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:

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username 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 ask your question there. Again, welcome! 七星 (talk) 15:16, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! This was really a great idea for a project! This is also my first time posting something on a talk page...hope I'm doing it right! As a side note, I've seen some typos on some locked wikipedia pages that I'd like to get my hands on, but I guess I won't be able to, eh? Any way to unlock a locked page? GoodbyeRosie (talk) 20:08, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Quick 'Wikipedia etiquette' question: Is it okay to put up the headings and subheadings on the AAC page even if no one's written anything yet? Or does it have to wait until someone posts what they've written for that section? For example, there's no section discussing populations - can I put up the headings and subheadings for that as a placeholder because this IS an article 'under repair', or is this considered a no-no?
Jesszahav (talk) 21:42, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Disagreement:
liyush, phlipphlop, chocohol, jerseylicious and I are disagreeing on a point that we hope you'll clear up for us. Are we supposed to do our research and editing on the WP:SUC/AAC http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:School_and_university_projects/AAC school project] page or on the already existing Augmentative and Alternative Communication page? I said the AAC page, they're saying that we have to put the things under where we signed up for what it is we want to do and that at some point you are going to create a new article with what we've written on the project page. I know we're allowed to play around in the sandbox on the project page, but could you let us know which page it is we're supposed to ultimately edit?
Thanks, Jesszahav (talk) 00:50, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for getting in touch all of you. I'll post an answer to your questions on the project page on the WP:SUP/AAC. But I'll post a message on your individual pages such so that you get the thrill of a message too! --Poule (talk) 13:32, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Content question:
I wanted to know what did you want to be included under the subheading 'outcomes'? As I was reading some articles on AAC and wanted to include some of the information I read in the 'outcomes' section but I am not sure what 'outcomes' you are referring to.
My other question is related to pictures. Where can I get pictures of some high-tech AAC devices (the most popular ones) and would it be ok to take a picture of a brochure I have and post something from that brochure?
Liyush (talk) 02:16, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Combining references
On the AAC page, you had this in the history: "adding ref names so that references that are the same go together into one reference". I was wondering how to do that - can you put the code for that on the project page, or send me a link where it explains how to do that?
Thanks!
Jesszahav (talk) 20:25, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Never mind, figured it out, but maybe it'll still be helpful for others... Jesszahav (talk) 02:38, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,I just added the ALS section to the AAC page. I was wondering if there's a way to link up key words to other sections of the same page. For example, I use the term VOCA which I'm sure will be defined elsewhere on the page. Thanks!--Karyna (talk) 17:18, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Poule, I added in my cerebral palsy section (it was about 4 or 5 paragraphs) and people edited it down to one paragraph now. I know public editing is allow in WP but I am just wondering how will you know what I wrote and how will you be able to mark my contribution. Thanks. willow1984 —Preceding undated comment added 19:17, 29 March 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Hi Poule, In order to get the sandbox section over to the actual article page, is it just as simple as copying and pasting, or is there another way to do this? Thanks! --Phlip phlop (talk) 19:15, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Poule, As I was working on the assignment, I thought that it might be helpful to list AAC devices and programs on the wikipedia page. The problem is that I'm not sure if this violates copyright laws or something like that. What do you think?--Karyna (talk) 17:40, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Poule, 2 quick questions: when you asked us to send you our real names over email, did you mean mcgill mail, or is there some WP mail that I haven't yet discovered? Also, how do I tell you that I collaborated with someone on a contribution, so that they get credit, too? thanks. Yamsey (talk) 05:03, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

September 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Augmentative and alternative communication has been reverted, as it appears to have removed content from the page without explanation. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Falcon8765 (talk) 20:48, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks but no thanks. I am an experienced editor and know what I am doing here. --Poule (talk) 20:58, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

March 2011

Hi Poule,

I hope this page is still active - I'm a pretty new editor and I'd like to do some work on the Augmentative_and_alternative_communication page and some of the nearby pages. I've got a couple of questions about the some of the original ideas - do you mind if pick your brain a bit?

Failedwizard (talk) 20:03, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Poole, You removed these paragraphs from the AAC article just now:

This view continued to dominate the field until the 1970s, when legislation began requiring that all children received educational services. As a result, many children with disabilities entered the school system, compelling classroom teachers to find ways in which to assist communicative exchanges.^[1]^[2]

Prior to the mid 1980s, individuals with Intellectual impairment were often not provided with AAC devices because it was believed that they did not demonstrate prerequisite skills for AAC, or because of the notion that AAC would interfere with speech development,^[3] although both these notions have since been disabused.^[4] Since the 1990s, users have increasingly been educated in the mainstream school system, as opposed to placing users in special schools or in one-to-one education. This has led professionals to seek ways for children with disabilities to participate more comprehensively and successfully in classroom activities. This inclusion model promotes the enrichment of functional skills taught within a natural context.^[1]^[2]

Can we talk about why for a bit? I thought it was very good content :) Failedwizard (talk) 15:59, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You'll see that I have summarized some of this information at the start, and that some of the information has been moved to another location. I am still in the process of editing this section. Maybe you can wait till I am finished, as there are going to be other additions and deletions, and it may be better to wait till it is done and you can see the whole thing. One thing to note is that some of this (legislation etc) very much only applies to European and North American settings. Thank you. Poule (talk) 16:03, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies - I certainly didn't mean to crowd you - and my concern was based on the fact that I thought a lot of information was lost in the summary process. I'm not quite following what you mean about European and North American settings? Does this mean that such information should be removed? I'm really confused... Failedwizard (talk) 16:14, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So I've come back a little later and I'm really liking all the new content - particularly the bits like Hall Roe and POSSUM - looking forward to see the results tomorrow - still confused by the European and North American settings reasoning thought? Failedwizard (talk) 18:29, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad you are liking it. My comment about Europe and NA was that we musn't generalize to the world from part of the world. For example, the legislation in the 1970s mandating school for all is actually referring to American legislation. We don't know when or if legislation like passed in the UK, Canada, Holland, Denmark, let alone India, Japan etc, and whether it influenced things, and we shouldn't make bald statements that implies that it did. Zangari is a better source for this stuff, as it has a much more worldwide view than Glennen and Hourcade.--Poule (talk) 20:23, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

AAC FAC

I am now prepared to nominate AAC as a featured article candidate. (The process is often quite slow... some current candidates were nominated in June or even May.) So first off, if you want me to wait a bit, speak now or forever hold your peace. Secondly, I propose naming you, me, and FW as co-nominators. Would this be acceptable to you? Thanks, – Quadell ^(talk) 21:35, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Yes, I think it would be be fine to nominate it now with all of us as co-nominators. I do have a few short, minor things on my to-do list; I will get to them as soon as I can, perhaps even tonight, since the houseguests have gone out.... Thanks for spearheading this drive; much appreciated. --Poule (talk) 22:19, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done. It's at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Augmentative and alternative communication/archive1, so you may want to add it to your watchlist. – Quadell ^(talk) 12:25, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Communication book.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Communication book.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:52, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wait!

Not sure if you've noticed but article just got a lot shorter (75k) shorter! Normally you know what you're doing when I panic but I thought I'd check....Failedwizard (talk) 23:05, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I have no idea how it happened but I wonder if it was during various saves that didn't finish at my end. I think I've put all the references etc back now. Poule (talk) 23:12, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No problem - I was just looking at the diffs and thought... 'huh?' ;) While my mind is on it - you reverted my change on rate enhancement, do you want to take over the change? No problems if you do :) Failedwizard (talk) 23:23, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No. Sorry. It must be another edit conflict snafu or something with the saving, since I didn't aim to revert a thing. I thought it all looked great. Maybe it is easier if you put it back yourself if you don't mind. I'm going for some supper. --Poule (talk) 23:26, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Best reply :) enjoy supper - I was quite enjoying our semi-cross-purpose editing - it's nice to be working with someone :) Failedwizard (talk) 23:30, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Falling asleep on keyboard here so will be back in eight hours. One and a half things left on the list currently Failedwizard (talk) 23:47, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Checking

Hi Poule, I've been assuming you're on the road as you mentioned, but I thought it might be a good idea to see if you were still checking user talk page messages or emails (I'm trying to gauge how off-wiki you are for cries for help) Failedwizard (talk) 15:54, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edits relevent to the review

Hi Poule, glad to see you back - the edits you've been making since you came back have a pretty strong relation to the reviewer's comments on Talk:Augmentative_and_alternative_communication#No_es_problema.2C_soy_un_.22baller.22 - could you pop a couple of comments in next to the relevent issues they identified? Just so we know which issues need to be reopened :)

Cheers,

Failedwizard (talk) 17:41, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I will --Poule (talk) 18:04, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey.

Reopened the FA conversation at our favourite article, feel free to pop by. Failedwizard (talk) 09:25, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA Speech generating device

Hi

I am a coordinator for the Robotics project. I will take a look over the weekend and try and see if there is anyway I can see to resolve any concerns. Did it go to reassessment/review? Chaosdruid (talk) 03:23, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have added some comments on the Speech generating device talk page. I would appreciate your input. Chaosdruid (talk) 02:15, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Might be relevant to your interests...

You haven't been around for a while - but you might like to weight in on this discussion... Fayedizard (talk) 16:12, 10 September 2012 (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) 14:00, 24 November 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) 14:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

^ ^a ^b Cite error: The named reference Glennen1997 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
^ ^a ^b Cite error: The named reference Hourcade2004 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
^ Wilkinson & Hennig.
^ Millar et al.

[Glennen1997-1] Cite error: The named reference Glennen1997 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

[Hourcade2004-2] Cite error: The named reference Hourcade2004 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

[Wilkinson-3] Wilkinson & Hennig.

[4] Millar et al.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]