Amf14

Hey, I found you back!

Hey Feeksters! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lino08 (talk • contribs) 04:15, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Psychology of Language

Welcome to the Psychology of Language Wikipedia course project. Below are links related to our course that may be helpful to you.

• APS Wikipedia Tools
• Psychology of Language Course Page
• List of User Pages for your Classmates
• Posting location for Empirical Article Summaries

Let me know if you have any questions. --Kechambers (talk) 19:49, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Babbling Edit

Final Choice

Babbling

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 14:21, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 14:08, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia: check out the Teahouse!

Hello! Amf14, you are invited to the Teahouse, a forum on Wikipedia for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and get support from peers and experienced editors. Please join us! Sarah (talk) 22:18, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Peer Review

Your page looks very good overall! It is extremely informative and researched. I don't know who wrote what, so I'll just give all my overall suggestions. My main suggestion would just be to divide things up a little bit, specifically the initial section about stages of babbling. You could possibly have one heading for the stages and a separate heading for the hypotheses. Also, all the animal sections were extremely interesting. Maybe include more direct explanations as to how they pertain to babbling specifically, rather than language development in general, if that makes sense. In the manual babbling in deaf infants there seems to be enough information for a whole separate page, which is awesome, but you might want to choose what is particularly relevant to babbling or split it up so it's not too overwhelming. Other than that it was very well-written and informative! Lcannaday (talk) 14:38, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Babbling

I just got your message -- I'm at work at the moment but will take a look this evening and will post a note here. Without looking at it yet, I can tell you that it's fine to do anything to a page up to and including completely replacing it so long as it's an improvement. There's usually no need to do that, but it's not forbidden or anything like that. More later -- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 16:12, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Mandy, I just took a look at Babbling, and also at User talk:Misaacso (I assume that's where you've been working on additional material). Can I ask why you're considering deleting the entire existing page? I'm not expert in the topic, but there does seem to be some real information in the existing page, though it's quite short and only partly cited. Are you planning to retain any of that material in your revised version? If so, you're not really deleting the whole article. Another way to answer your question is that nothing in the existing article is sacred -- if you can improve any part of it, feel free to do so. However, you shouldn't remove information if you're not simultaneously replacing it with better information on the same topic.

If you don't mind my asking, can you tell me why you're working on Misaacso's talk page, instead of editing the article directly? It looks like there's quite a bit of good material in your draft, and if you work directly on the article you sometimes get the side benefit of having other editors show up to help with the new material. It's up to you, of course, but I think one of the fun things about Wikipedia is working on live articles.

If you have more questions I'm happy to respond here or by email; or if you prefer we can do an online chat session. I've watchlisted Babbling and will keep an eye on it, and see if I can help out. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:09, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I think that material can probably go -- as you say some of it seems correct but if you're planning to put in some referenced discussion of the topic there's no reason to keep the unreferenced material. Generally I try not to delete unreferenced material if I think it's accurate; I would rather find a citation for it, or failing that, replace it with material that covers the same ground that I can cite. It sounds like that's the approach you're taking, so that's fine. Let me know if you have any other questions. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 10:31, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

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) 19:20, 21 May 2012 (UTC)