User talk:Klidessau

Welcome

Hello, Klidessau and welcome to Wikipedia! It appears you are participating in a class project. If you haven't done so already, we encourage you to go through our training for students. Your instructor or professor may wish to set up a course page, if your class doesn't already have one.

Go through our online training for students.

If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{Helpme}} before the question. Please also read this helpful advice for students.

Before you create an article, make sure you understand what kind of articles are accepted here. Remember: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and while many topics are encyclopedic, some things are not.

It is highly recommended that you place this text: {{Educational assignment}} on the talk page of any articles you are working on as part of your Wikipedia-related course assignment. This will let other editors know this article is a subject of an educational assignment and should be treated accordingly.

We hope you like it here and encourage you to stay even after your assignment is finished! Stuartyeates (talk) 03:49, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to WIKISOO!

Hi Kathryn, welcome to class! Contact me should you ever have any questions, and be sure to visit the class home page anytime to get oriented! Hope to see you in class on Tuesday. P.S. - The text above is not directly related to our class. :) -Sara FB (talk) 02:15, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

A pointer!

Hi Kathy, I see your post on Margaret's talk page. Great idea! If you have a look at it again you'll see that you've accidentally placed your text in the "category" format, so the page is expecting it to be a link to a set of other pages (which, somewhat confusingly, is what a "category" is in Wikipedia!) I'm tempted to talk you through editing it to appear as regular text, but wanted to suggest you give it another shot on your own by clicking the "edit" tab and simply comparing your comments to those above it. Clue: technically I'm thinking that you don't want a "category" but actually a header, and these are usually set off by two flanking equals signs as I used in my post above yours. I do a lot of copying to learn Wiki skills. I've said enough... give it another shot and ask me if you have questions! :) - Sara FB (talk) 00:52, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit if you feel they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/PhET Interactive Simulations.
• To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the . Please remember to link to the submission!
• You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! j⚛e decker^talk 01:10, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

PhET article

Hi Klidessau, I see your draft article: Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/PhET Interactive Simulations It's great to see you working on this! The most important step for creating a new Wikipedia article is to establish the subject's notability, according to the way Wikipedia defines it: WP:GNG or WP:COMPANY. The way to go about that is to gather the most authoritative independent sources that have covered the topic. Have the simulations been written up in, say, the Chronicle of Higher Education or similar? If you can provide a few links or references, I'd be happy to help you weave them into the draft article, and hopefully we can get it accepted. Let me know how I can help! -Pete (talk) 03:48, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

The article is really coming along! I am impressed with your extensive work to improve the article since I last saw it. You describe PhET in clear terms, and have added several high quality sources. Personally, I think you have done a good job of expressing the initiative's notability in the article; but it may still be in a grey area from some perspectives. One thing that I noticed is that while you mention awards, only one is identified specifically; and this is at the very bottom of the article. Awards can be an important ingredient in establishing notability, so you might want to think about weaving that into the article in the lead section or similiar, before moving the article to main space. But, I think you are very close! I hope you will share this project on our class discussion page as well, I think your fellow students will be interested to see your work. Good job! -Pete (talk) 18:53, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Pete. I'll try and work on weaving in the awards. I have one more reference from a book that I want to weave in to differentiate the design process. I'll also share the project on the class discussion page. Thanks for the feedback! Klidessau (talk) 19:30, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Kathy, I think we should add something about OER. I started to say that the activities are also part of the OER community, then I realized that I didn't see OER in the article yet. Where do you think it should be included?Patricia.Loeblein (talk) 02:29, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Not sure...maybe in the beginning...I think you want to spell it out as open education resource. I added it in the beginning...see what you think. Klidessau (talk) 02:54, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

See you in class?

Hey, hope you can make it to the WIKISOO class in about 20 minutes... its link is from the week 3 page. Keep in touch! -Sara FB (talk) 00:35, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Great to see you hard at work

Hey Kathy - your contributions are really adding up! Cool. See you in class shortly I hope. - Sara FB (talk) 00:52, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Conversation with Trish

Kathy, I am a chicken still to make edits to the article until I check with you. I wonder about adding links to: 1. news page http://phet.colorado.edu/en/about/news 2. "Who we are" section of the About PhET page http://phet.colorado.edu/en/about (Is there a way to have the link go straight to the pic and list of team members? 3. to the Research page http://phet.colorado.edu/en/research (it includes more articles - or is it better to put each article reference in the WP article?) What do you think about a section that briefly describes the team structure? I like history being rather short, but so far the focus is on the directors only (should we include the time when KP and WA shared being directors?)When I meet people or give talks, there is a high interest in who we are and people are genuinely surprised at the small number. Might this be perceived as "self-serving". I know that is a touchy point with Wikipedia. Patricia.Loeblein (talk) 17:22, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi Trish, Thought I'd answer these questions here...I haven't yet gotten to the new, who are we etc...but I was following the example of the Khan Academy and we have to be very careful to cite 2nd party sources, not our own. Take a look at the Khan Academy. I modeled ours after theirs.Klidessau (talk) 17:24, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Great this is good practice. Well I thought when I hit Save I could go back and make changes. I am using my phone as a hot spot, so I was worried that I would lose my stuff. Then I got a rather cryptic message that I had not followed WP protocol and some one else was editing the page as the same time as me (turned out to be you), so I think some stuff got lost. Well at least I am trying. I had made a new section for "Ideas from Trish" but that didn't get through. Do you want mine to be a section? I will check out the Khan. It helps to know what you are modeling. It's too bad I haven't used WP much. Patricia.Loeblein (talk) 17:22, 7 June 2013 (UTC) Another thing can you tell where I am supposed to insert the 4 ~ 's beginning or end of something that I add? Welcome to being a teacher of a needy student.Patricia.Loeblein (talk) 17:22, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Hey Trish, Either way on the new section. You can do that though by adding a new section along the tabs on the top of the page (I think the right hand side). Might be good to have a new section.Klidessau (talk) 17:24, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

I made this section before, but I think you were editing at the same time, so my change got kicked out. I am trying again.Patricia.Loeblein (talk) 17:51, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Kathy, I added a section called "Organization" just to try adding a section and some cites. I got the idea for the topic from the FA article Pette recommended https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belarusian_Republican_Youth_Union . Do you know how to change the order of the "contents". Patricia.Loeblein (talk) 18:24, 9 June 2013 (UTC) I will be back later to add more.

Hey Trish, You can just copy and paste in there.

Thanks I am wondering about the 4 different "links/cites" I see in articles: for example in the second paragraph of the article you have "PhET (phet.colorado.edu)" , then a hot link to "physics"physics , then a numbered cite (, and then Spanish. This is one thing that I think would go in the Google doc.Patricia.Loeblein (talk) 21:33, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Kathy - you are a rock star. You should blog about the article getting accepted. Would you try to follow the talkback link to help me understand the different choices you made in your citing?

Hello, Klidessau. You have new messages at Patricia.Loeblein's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Patricia.Loeblein (talk) 02:00, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Hey Trish, so some are articles within Wikipedia...like physics, some are third part sources which are numbered as you would in a paper and some are hyperlinks to website. Does that help a little. Truthfully, I kind of copied and pasted from other wikipedia articles and flew by the seat of my pants! Klidessau (talk) 02:03, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Keep it up....

Kathy, your article is in tip-top shape and I don't feel as qualified as Pete to discuss it. It's looking great though! - Sara FB (talk) 06:17, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

I agree -- I think it's ready to be "published" (moved to the main namespace). You can do this very easily: just go to your draft, find the tab that says "move", and enter the new title (PhET or PhET Interactive Simulations). For the edit summary, you might say something like "Have added independent citations and expanded article since AfC review." Before or after you move it, you should of course remove the big banner at the top -- which you would do by deleting the first line, which begins {{AFC submission…

I'd also advise you to leave a note on the talk page saying that you work for the organization, but are aware of Wikipedia's guidelines around conflicts of interest and are not seeking to use Wikipedia as a promotional vehicle. Making this kind of disclosure upfront (and on the talk page, in addition to your own user page) is an important way to signal to other Wikipedians that you're open to feedback and aiming to support Wikipedia's vision.

Good work! Looking forward to seeing the article published. -Pete (talk) 16:00, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Sorry to confuse! To put it simply, the articles for creation process is mainly designed for people who are not getting guidance in their introduction to Wikipedia. For your purposes, I think it introduces unnecessary "busy work." You are welcome to follow its process if you like, but what I'm suggesting is that you just skip it and put the article in main space yourself. You have made a good effort to find suitable sources and structure the article carefully; you don't need formal approval to publish it. -Pete (talk) 18:02, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Wow...that's pretty cool! So then should I move it to "Wikipedia" in the Move Pull Down tab? Thanks! Klidessau (talk) 18:14, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Yes, exactly -- choose "Wikipedia" from the drop-down menu, and then type in the title you want to use. Where I said "edit summary" above I meant "Reason" -- I misremembered the name of the field. Also, once you publish it, you will want to add a link to the Phet disambiguation page! -Pete (talk) 18:23, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Done! How exciting! Thanks for all your help! Klidessau (talk) 19:01, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited PhET Interactive Simulations, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pearson (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:46, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Fixed the link to Pearson Education. Thanks Klidessau (talk) 14:01, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

mining course for places to cite or get involved

Kathy, I am thinking we could add some ideas to the Google doc of groups we want to contact or use for links. Week 5 course: http://wikieducator.org/Main_Page (when I searched for PhET I found some information about using phet)

http://www.doleta.gov/taaccct/ community college funds for creating OER (maybe they would like to write activities?

22:46, 14 June 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Patricia.Loeblein (talk • contribs)

Edit summaries

Hi Kathy, looks like you're making great strides with the PhET article! I'd like to urge you to use the EDITSUMMARY field every time you make a change. Even a brief note can help a great deal when others are taking a look at what you're up to. It's especially important when you are removing a significant amount of content, and even moreso if that removes sources. For instance, your latest edit removed about 2500 letters from the article. When I see that, I trust that it was removed for some good reason, because I know you; but most Wikipedians don't know anything about you, and an edit like that, when unexplained, is difficult to distinguish from vandalism. It's best to get in the habit of leaving an edit summary every time you save a change. -Pete (talk) 19:06, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Pete. I thought the same thing....I need to add in summaries better! BTW, I just blogged on the article! Kathy 76.120.78.123 (talk) 19:10, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

That's fantastic, Kathy! Would love to see the link -- could you post it to the course talk page? -Pete (talk) 23:47, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Should be there now...BTW, thanks for a great experience. 76.120.78.123 (talk) 00:13, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Need to get more reviews ideas from lab

Hi Kathy, I asked about the flags on the article and also the pieces in my sandbox.
1. Flags about not enough content from others. Places to get more outside influence in our article: (BTW Pete thought that the person who flagged us for writing an article about our group was over harsh)Patricia.Loeblein (talk) 02:17, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

• Wikipedia:Peer review
• Community forums
• Maybe someone in Education research?
• CiteSeerX citeSeer http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/index;jsessionid=FE645B1AE2A2FCB685E0A819CA2E31F7
• Google news (but I didn't have any luck) Patricia.Loeblein (talk • contribs) 01:51, 21 June 2013 (UTC)Patricia.Loeblein (talk) 02:14, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
• Google news (but I didn't find anything) Patricia.Loeblein (talk) 02:14, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

2. My section in sandbox - overall people in the class thought the additions to other organizations seem like a good idea, but it would be nice to add references from articles in publications that refer to the organization - (like in AAPT publication blah blah, Physics Front talks about how to use PhET.) I added a couple of references, but the format is not done correct yet. Could you check and see if you think I am making progress and if you can cut an paste anything yet or fix my cites? Our classmates think this should happen soon.

BTW :KP said the reason the WP Phet article comes up second for you is that Google keeps track of your use and that the article would appear in different order for variant users. Patricia.Loeblein (talk) 03:20, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Patricia.Loeblein (talk) 01:34, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Trish...looks good. I think playing in the sandbox is a great way to work on, makes notes and polish before you publish. Whenever you think that you're polished enough, go ahead and publish. Klidessau (talk) 03:39, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Kathy, can you figure out why a couple of my footnotes have "@" at the beginning or is that ok? I copied the reference from the BibTeX on the CiteSeerX page of the article. Patricia.Loeblein (talk) 04:17, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Kathy I posted the revisions and asked Pete to review them. I will be traveling for a few hours. I will check back later. Thanks for your help Patricia.Loeblein (talk) 19:05, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

PhET link

During lab 6, it was noticed that if someone searches specifically "PhET" there wasn't a dis-ambiguous page, so an article was added to send people straight to PhET Interactive Simulations. Patricia.Loeblein (talk) 01:38, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Great...I had done only Phet. Apparently capitalization matters Klidessau (talk) 03:37, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

the capitalization was surprising to Pete too. He remarked that it was a good thing to discover in lab. Patricia.Loeblein (talk) 04:17, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Congratulations on a job well done!

	WIKISOO Burba Badge
	You have earned the WIKISOO Burba Badge through your participation in the online course Writing Wikipedia Articles, and your work on the PhET Interactive Simulations article.

Kathy, thank you for taking our class, and congratulations on a job well done! You may want to place the badge above on your user page. Also, as a badgeholder, you are now able to award the badge to others who earn it. Happy editing, and we'll see you around the wiki! Pete (talk) 17:07, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

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) 17:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)