User talk:Smlombardi/Archive 1

Speedy deletion nomination of Article:Stewart Hase/Archive 1

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created was tagged as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Cabe 6403 ^{(Talk•Sign)} 16:05, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Archiving

Hey there, I figured you tried to archive the talk page here: Talk:Stewart Hase. Do create an archive page, the easiest way to do it is simply add /Archive n (where n is whatever number you're on) to the page title. I.e. Talk:Stewart Hase/Archive 1. I've moved the content from article space over into that page for you and left a CSD as a blank page on the article. Any questions, just ask Cabe 6403 ^{(Talk•Sign)} 16:10, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Educational_Researcher

Your request at the Resource Exchange has been answered. If you got it, please mark that request as {{resolved}}. Thanks, LeadSongDog come howl! 17:55, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Theory v Movement

Greetings,

I see you have changed "theory" to movement in those articles in phil of ed. Whether or not something is a movement is a matter of debate, and some of the same types of things may never attain a movement to support them. However, whether or not all of those things are theories (i.e. a collection of concept which together support a certain conclusion) is pretty indisputable. I think theory is better, and in fact, at some point there may be a "theories of education" category. Almost every other philosophy area has its own "theories" category. It isn't a big deal for me right now though. I just thought I'd give my observations on the issue. Keep up the great work and be well, Greg Bard (talk) 20:39, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you . . . the problem is consistency with the Philosophy of education article . . . there was great debate on that article about syntax and taxonomy when using the term philosophy or theory in connection with Behaviorism, Cognitivism, Humanism, and Constructivism so to maintain balance and focus on the concepts being discussed I skirted the issue by using the term 'movement' which might be less controversial if I use the term 'perspectives'.Stmullin (talk) 22:40, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Smlombardi, we moved your Teahouse host profile

Hello Stmullin! Thank you for being a host at the Teahouse. However, we haven't heard from you lately, so our bot has moved your Host profile from the host landing page to the host breakroom. No worries; you can always just Check in and our bot will move your profile back. Editing any Teahouse-related page will do the same thing for you. If you would prefer not to receive reminders like this, you can unsubscribe here. Thanks for your help at the Teahouse! HostBot (talk) 03:50, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree files

Some of your files may be unfree. See Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2013 November 1#OTRS pending since June. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:17, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We received permission from Dr. Hase several months ago . . . the photo can be moved to Commons.Stmullin (talk) 10:43, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Stmullin. The information provided on the talk page of the file indicates that the email Dr Hase is not adequate, as they did not specify under which license they are releasing the image. A list of compatible licenses is available at Wikipedia:Licenses#For image creators. Also, there is no obvious connection between the sender of the email and the copyright on the image. -- Diannaa (talk) 01:29, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Diannaa . . . Would you please send Dr. Hase the information necessary to adequately verify the information . . .65.190.196.45 (talk) 00:12, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done -- Diannaa (talk) 00:53, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]