User talk:Kenneth M Burke/Archive2

Systems theory

I found in the backlog a version of the systems theory page before my work [1]. I post it on my discussion page simply for reference. --Kenneth M Burke 23:35, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Self assessment: We cannot underestimate feedback from a social environment; but, self assessments are important also. I think my greatest problem in working on the systems theory page is my multiple saves. That is a very bad habit I acquired in working on website designs. I have done well to try to break the habit on Wikipedia, but the systems theory page was in such an disarray and I wanted to ensure that I synthesized previous users work. Previewing is something that I will continue work on. I put much work into the page and was working on it before the systems project was even on Wikipedia. Ah well, grin and bear it. I will make sure my sources are correct in the near future, then I am done.--Kenneth M Burke 16:43, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote an article about Debora Hammond, because we spoke of here. Maybe you can take at it. Greetings - Mdd 01:19, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks very nice! I'll read more closely later. Thanks.--Kenneth M Burke 03:01, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your comment on Talk:Philosophy of science

Hi, i've just read your comment on constructivism, i hadn't seen it for the discussion was quite old. Thanks for the readings, they look interesting. I'm also interested on articles on the difference between American individualism in psychology and European intersubjectivity Cheers. Chrisdel 18:26, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Chrisdel 16:51, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Economics of education

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Economics of education, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}.

DGG (talk) 23:08, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the deletion tag because the subject is hardly trivial. It is now tagged as a stub and calls for references. The page was created less than a day ago, give it a chance. It is marked as a high priority stub in both education and economics. --Kenneth M Burke 23:45, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have now sought approval for the stub. My apologies for not doing so in the first place. Thanks. --Kenneth M Burke 23:55, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! The deletion tag was a nomination to delete the stub-class article itself, not the stub type. WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals is for proposing new stub types, not stub articles, but thanks for trying to work within the system. Happy editing! Her Pegship (tis herself) 18:21, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Now there is confusion. As such, I will call the page for speedy deletion so that the stub can go through the approval process accordingly. --Kenneth M Burke 18:37, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Random Smile!

Systems theory

Hello. In response to your e-mail, any article has the potential to be AfDed. Assess the above article with reference to the criteria under which it falls and use this assessment as your business case in building the AfD. The evidence should then present itself with little-or-no equivocation. If it doesn't build in to a solid business case then the article is probably notable at that point in time. Secondly, if you believe that someone is editing using multiple accounts and that these accounts are being used to bolster an argument and shout down a debate then you may be able to build a Sockpuppet report. Please read Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets for further information about reporting this activity. This can be confirmed with a checkuser, run by an appropriate person. Regards, (aeropagitica) 00:40, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the League of Copyeditors

I'm very sorry I haven't had a chance to welcome you earlier, I have been incredibly busy lately. We are glad to have your help. Currently, we have really cut down the backlog of articles in need of copyedit. Therefore, a major goal at this moment is to identify new articles that are in need of work. When you run across them, be sure to tag them for copyediting.

If you have any questions at all, do not hesitate to drop me a line. Trusilver 06:27, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, think I'm in need of a bit of a rest from the computer for a while; but, I anticipate helping out soon. --Kenneth M Burke 21:21, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

Hi, Thanks a lot for the barnstar on my user page. Next is for me :-) . Cheers. Chrisdel 13:16, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shareef Abdur-Rahim

Just to congratulate you on a good copyedit - it was an easy proofread. Welcome to the League! Cricketgirl 05:28, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Many thanks for the copy-editing. In this case, in Spanish we usually say "corregir" or "revisar". "Ya está corregida", "ya está revisada", "ya lo he revisado", etc. --Lionni 20:25, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, si. Gracias. --Kenneth M Burke 22:03, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Kenneth. The Lazarillo has indeed two categories, text and illustration. (I hope to translate, sometime, the Spanish article on this award, for it is one of the most appreciated prizes in Spain, in the field of children's literature and illustration.) Balzola won it in 1965 for the illustration of an anthology of children's popular poetry. The present phrasing is therefore OK. Thanks again for your help and attention. --Lionni 06:42, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lethbridge Collegiate Institute

Thank you from the bottom of my heart for your copyediting work on this article. I wrote it pretty much by myself, and I just can't get the art of encylopedic writing down. It looks much better now. -- Phoenix2 ^(holla) 04:08, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's okay, I don't think I've yet met a user that can really claim authoritative knowledge on writing for an encyclopedia, and I think in many ways the encyclopedia itself is still trying to get the hang of being an encyclopedia. You may want to check some of the sources though. I'll probably finish up today or the next. Thanks for the note. --Kenneth M Burke 18:42, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Update

You can find my update at http://isss.org/projects/primer_2.0 hope you find it helpful. tom —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.247.5.18 (talk) 04:46, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's quite nice. Not sure Wikipedia will ever produce something as such. I'm afraid even much to touch the page from fear of grumbly Wikipedia monsters and multiple user personalities! Thanks for sharing, Tom.--Kenneth M Burke 23:30, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you should look at the alternative...tom209.247.5.16 06:28, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wandering my talkpage for no good reason?

Template idea

The quality of this article or section may be compromised due to the death-full haunting of a Wikipedia monster-- plagued by users that engage in practices for which contributors to the encyclopedia have been criticized.
Please help improve this article in accordance with Wikipedia Civility Policy.

--Kenneth M Burke 22:44, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is nice

The International Journal of Knowledge, Culture, and Change Management [2]

Thanks (#2)

Thank you for copyediting Consolidation of Sweden. I was the one who requested the copyedit. The article is somewhat controversial to some, and it might be that those persons revert parts of what you have written. I hope you will not be disconcerted by that; your efforts are appreciated. Thanks again. / Fred-J 17:18, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome, interesting I think (compare to Russian history and similar debates). If you need anything else, just ask.--Kenneth M Burke 21:19, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]