I'm really impressed to see this project here. I want to congratulate Aiden and Claire for this bold experiment in education, and the students for the really good content they are putting in (from what I've seen so far). You will have seen that Psychology articles are in a dire, often misleading state, and there are few of us editors here to improve them. Your coming here seems to be a real win-win situation, as the Psychology content of Wikipedia is improved and, though unexpected and sometimes unwelcome things can happen, I think the process can be very educational in writing and researching academic topics.
Some points that might be helpful, take or leave them:
Thanks once again! I hope you all have positive experiences with Wikipedia and continue to take part in it after this course. MartinPoulter ( talk) 20:49, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
Great work guys - what a fantastic idea... totally echo what Martin and Faintes say. I have been very impressed by the content I've seen so far. Imagine if only 1% of university courses did this.... I personally find editing rewarding and a great way to learn about subjects that I'm interested in, and it looks like your students have benefited too. Finereach ( talk) 22:18, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
I am trying to remove the section "Inapplicability to the Holocaust" from The Milgram Experiment. The section rests on a couple questionable citations. Unsurprisingly, the controversial nature of the topic has spurred an edit war.
In order to summarize my reasoning for removing the section I quote Daniel Kahneman, “Changing one’s mind about human nature is hard work, and changing one’s mind for the worse about oneself is even harder." [1] I have provided more explanation on the talk page. Since at the moment, there are only two sides to the current debate, I would greatly appreciate any comments especially from anyone who is familiar with self and other bias. Thanks for your time. Aetherist ( talk) 13:10, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
I'm really impressed to see this project here. I want to congratulate Aiden and Claire for this bold experiment in education, and the students for the really good content they are putting in (from what I've seen so far). You will have seen that Psychology articles are in a dire, often misleading state, and there are few of us editors here to improve them. Your coming here seems to be a real win-win situation, as the Psychology content of Wikipedia is improved and, though unexpected and sometimes unwelcome things can happen, I think the process can be very educational in writing and researching academic topics.
Some points that might be helpful, take or leave them:
Thanks once again! I hope you all have positive experiences with Wikipedia and continue to take part in it after this course. MartinPoulter ( talk) 20:49, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
Great work guys - what a fantastic idea... totally echo what Martin and Faintes say. I have been very impressed by the content I've seen so far. Imagine if only 1% of university courses did this.... I personally find editing rewarding and a great way to learn about subjects that I'm interested in, and it looks like your students have benefited too. Finereach ( talk) 22:18, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
I am trying to remove the section "Inapplicability to the Holocaust" from The Milgram Experiment. The section rests on a couple questionable citations. Unsurprisingly, the controversial nature of the topic has spurred an edit war.
In order to summarize my reasoning for removing the section I quote Daniel Kahneman, “Changing one’s mind about human nature is hard work, and changing one’s mind for the worse about oneself is even harder." [1] I have provided more explanation on the talk page. Since at the moment, there are only two sides to the current debate, I would greatly appreciate any comments especially from anyone who is familiar with self and other bias. Thanks for your time. Aetherist ( talk) 13:10, 21 July 2013 (UTC)