User talk:Tomcloyd/Archive 3

Proposed deletion of Resources for WEP Region 9 faculty & students

The article Resources for WEP Region 9 faculty & students has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Wikipedia is not a "How To" guide (WP:NOTHOWTO)

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may bedeleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but otherdeletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, andarticles for deletion allows discussion to reachconsensus for deletion.Inks.LWC (talk) 07:28, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Template talk:Rescue

Responding to RFCs

Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:Rescue. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and isnot a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot(talk) 05:16, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. Have absolutely no knowledge of this issue, and no time to get up to speed. Just a really bad time to ask anything of me, right now. Tom Cloyd (talk)

Removal of the PROD on Resources for WEP Region 9 faculty & students

What was your reasoning for removing the PROD tag on Resources for WEP Region 9 faculty & students? Inks.LWC (talk) 07:41, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was writing it when you edited again on top of me. How about giving me a moment or two?Tom Cloyd (talk)

Hello, I have moved this page into your user space, at User:Tomcloyd/Resources for WEP Region 9 faculty & students. Such pages should not be kept in mainspace. For the moment, I've left a redirect in place so as not to break things, but this redirect should be removed in a few days, so if you have external links pointing to the page, I recommend updating them. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:23, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Have taken care of it. Sorry for the fuss. A blunder on my part. Tom Cloyd (talk) 08:25, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Resources for WEP Region 9 faculty & students for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the articleResources for WEP Region 9 faculty & students is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Resources for WEP Region 9 faculty & students until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Inks.LWC (talk) 07:48, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Edit warring

Responding to RFCs

Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Edit warring. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot(talk) 16:36, 21 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Universities in Seattle

Hello. I would love to talk to you about promoting Wikipedia among students in Seattle. How should I contact you? I would email you, but the notice said to post here. Blue Rasberry(talk)14:45, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Contact me at t*c*@*t*o*m*c*l*o*y*d*.*c*o*m (after a little cleanup!). I look forward to hearing from you.Tom Cloyd (talk) 20:01, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

geonotices

Hi Tom! You geonotices for Seatlle, Spokane and Missoula are up. These appear only at the top of the watchlist for affected users (and you can dismiss them if not interested), so we usually keep them up for as long as it's helpful. By default, I've been putting CA recruitment notices up for a month at a time. Cheer--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 14:26, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A cup of tea for you!

This cup of tea is a thank-you for diligence and passion in the Wikipedia in Higher Education movement--you are proving to be an adept and motivated regional ambassador! Mattsenate(talk) 16:48, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The cup of tea was from Matt, not me! But indeed, you've earned it. :) --Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 17:18, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seattle ambassador

Hello-- After seeing your call for ambassadors, I wish to be considered as a Seattle-based representative. I am a teacher and have already worked with students on campus involved in Wikipedia. I'd welcome more training, though, to strengthen my contributions. If you should have questions or wish further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you for your consideration. ```` — Preceding unsigned comment added byHistorytrain (talk • contribs) 21:51, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

---

Please contact me ASAP (due to a training deadline we're facing) at *t*c*@*t*o*m*c*l*o*y*d*.*c*o*m* (do clean that up first!). You can speed up the process by:

1. Reading Wikipedia Campus Ambassadors - what we're looking for , then sending me

2. Application for prospective Campus Ambassadors - available in two forms - aPDF version , and aGoogle Docs version. The former may be printed and filed out by hand, and the latter will download to your computer as a word processor document -use the "File > download as..." link in the Google Docs interface. Attaching either to an email would be advisable. I look forward to hearing from you!

Tom Cloyd (talk) 03:59, 31 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ambassador Program

Hi Tom - I am interested in this opportunity. I am the Director for eLearning at Whatcom Community College in Bellingham, WA. We are very involved in Open Source educational technologies. I am also a PhD candidate the University of British Columbia. My Anthropology based research relates to wiki technology and global information mobilization. Hope we can work together.

Michael Shepard

Michael Shepard eLearning Director Whatcom Community College [e-mail] 360. 383.3275 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.156.1.178 (talk) 17:06, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Michael - I have your application. Watch your email. Thanks! TomCloyd (talk) 17:26, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Campus Ambassador

I received an email requesting that "Campus Ambassador" applications be submitted to you.

My name is Brad Marshall as serve as a project coordinator for the department of Academic Technologies at BYU-Idaho, in Rexburg, ID.

I am interested in the potential of becoming a Campus Ambassador and attending the training that will be provided later this month. Here is a url to my contact page at the university (http://web.byui.edu/Directory/Employee/marshallb).

If you have any questions, please ask.

Bsmarsh333 (talk) 17:46, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Brad - I'm happy to read of your interest. Am going to your contact page now. TomCloyd (talk) 17:49, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Tom, I am the instructional designer at Western Washington University in Bellingham, Washington. I am very interested in your embassador program and would like to participate. I teach classes and workshops in technology for teaching and believe this could really be a very interesting topic. Thanks,

Peter Agras Instructional designer Western Washington University Bellingham, Washington 360-255-1879 [e-mail] — Preceding unsigned comment added byAgrasj (talk • contribs) 19:53, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Peter - have contacted you and you're in, as you know. Tom Cloyd (talk) 00:23, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Campus Ambassador?

Hi Tomcloyd, I'm VERY interested! When in August will the training be? Can you attend via webcam? I may not be in this country in mid-August.WIERDGREENMAN, Thane of Cawdor THE CAKE IS A LIE (talk) 15:35, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's in Seattle, Aug. 19-20. We don't have any distance tech. set up nor any plans to do so, however, we are moving fast to a web-based format. The fellow who'll do the bulk of the work is talking about having it up in approx. 30 day, which is likely optimistic. I do know that we'll almost surely need another training in the Seattle area for Campus Ambassadors in the Region I manage (Alaska to Arizona, minus California) before Sept. 1. Contact me at t-c-(-a-t-)-t-o-m-c-l-o-y-d-.-c-o-m for more information. Thanks for your interest. Tom Cloyd (talk) 15:44, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WGUP

Hi Tom,

I'm interested in the upcoming training in Seattle. I teach at the Evergreen State College in Olympia WA, and I'm the eLearning Manager at South Puget Sound Community College. I've been using Wikipedia for class projects for 3-4 years, and I'd be very interested in learning more about what others are doing, and how to encourage folks to get involved.

Cheers,

RToes (talk) 16:31, 8 August 2011 (UTC) [e-mail][reply]

We've talked by phone, and you're in. Tom Cloyd (talk) 00:25, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

PTSD

Hi Tom Why are you so obsessed with the image of lucretia? PTSD is not about art. Also your insistence of putting that image in there is based on a probability that she may have suffered mental trauma due to the incident. However, this image does not show that, it shows the mere act. Again, not all rapes or assaults end up with a traumatised (PTSD) victim. Therefore the image is inappropriate. PTSD is about the mind and how it can be affected in relation to traumatic events, not to the specific event itself (that (may have) caused it). PTSD is a psychological effect, not an actual event. If you love that painting then create yourself a website dedicated to it. Not place it in places it is only tangentially related. Though if you are trying to bring forward the thinking that PTSD doesnt just happen to combat veterans I can understand the motive. I just dont think it is an appropriate place for it. Would it be appropriate to place it in the article on rape? Probably not. Chris — Preceding unsigned comment added by84.12.125.50 (talk) 07:37, 22 September 2011 (UTC) Sorry forgot to sign 84.12.125.50(talk) 07:40, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Have you read any of the previous discussion about this? That would save me time, and explain some things to you, I think. In summary - art illustrations for various mental health articles and psychology articles are common in the literature. Look at the cover of the weekly Journal of the American Medical Association, for example, and at Wikipedia's Major Depression article. There is an established tradition of doing this that goes back years. Practitioners in these fields are educated people, and familiarity/appreciation with fine art is not rare among them.

"Lucretia" is a legend that may have factual basis. We don't know. The story is that she committed suicide soon after the rape, so she couldn't have had PTSD, but well could have had ASD. It's an ILLUSTRATION of something, not a documentary depiction, in this context, and its use here is very well rationalized in the previous discussion.

I totally agree with your distinction between events and the mind's response to them. Too many people fail to make that distinction, sadly. But...a prior traumatic event IS needed for the diagnosis to be made. Also, exactly how would we illustrate a mental response that clearly indicates PTSD? The painting depicts an event that clearly matches the description of what's required for the diagnosis, according to the DSM - threat of death, loss of bodily integrity, etc. It's right on target.

I don't love the painting. It's simply the best of the public domain paintings available to me in the time I had to search for one, and it's been a search occurring over many months. It calls attention to something very important, and well documented, although indirectly: Most PTSD occurs in woman, most is due to sexual trauma. Most public funding and attention for PTSD goes to male soldiers, and this is flatly an ill-conceived response.

Is the painting painful? Yes. But that's the nature of the disorder, too. Let's not powderpuff this, or continue to perpetuate public misconceptions. PTSD is about awful things happening mostly to woman, and, in the main, involving sex. I just made a very plain statement, and this is news to 95% of the people I talk with about PTSD. The painting is the best I could find to make, visually, exactly the same statement. If you have something better, propose it. Otherwise, the painting works, I think, and others have said the same thing.

Tom Cloyd (talk) 07:57, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback on this. Although I dont withdraw the objection I will no longer interfere with the presence of the image, it is at least not a picture of a soldier. However, victims would be highly unlikely to read JAMA, but very likely to read a wikipedia article, before or after a diagnosis - people like to feel part of a group, not unique - one unique in suffering is a tragedy, whereas a group (in suffering) have someone to associate with. I do, however, agree with what I believe you (and perhaps others) are attempting to do, and that is not to portray combat veterans as being the only victims of this (that being the majority viewpoint, especially from the media (which needs to change)). Re-victimization is a point with this eg a person who suffers a trauma may not develop PTSD until they have been blamed themselves for the event (especially if this is not the case) and/or disbelieved etc. One of my points is to not to have the article concentrate on a single area eg female rape victims, or male soldiers, and so under (or not at all) represent others. 84.12.125.50 (talk) 12:01, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm grateful that you're open to reason. Refreshing.

"...it is at least not a picture of a soldier..." Yes, and that's no small thing.

"...victims would be highly unlikely to read JAMA..." Generally, yes, but that's not what was expected. Increasingly as I get time to work on it, the article follows several conventions (of which the use of fine art illustrations is one) which have a distinct connotative, if not denotative, meaning: 'this is written by mental health professionals who are part of a larger community of people participating in professional discussions and presentations going back generations; this is not the product of a team of college sophomores.' This meaning will be missed by some, but not by all, and certainly not by most other professionals, who we want to recommend the article to their clients. That may seem like a lot of freight for these various professional culture indicators in the article to carry, but I believe they do.

"...One of my points is to not to have the article concentrate on a single area..." The painting does (what else could it do?), but I don't think the article does. I'm keenly aware that many subsections lack the sort of balanced discussion of multiple major victim groups which I'd like to see, and I'm working on that. It would help if people like you, with passion and some real knowledge of things would register an account and begin active, substantive contributions. This is real work, however, and that's why I'm not making progress here more quickly. That's also why we have no other long term committed workers on this article. I treat PTSD. I care a great deal about the accuracy of this article. Most others that I see contribute here are "drive-bys". Their contributions are often valuable, but their commitment is limited.

The painting is not a perfect choice, just the best we've yet come up with. I have proposed an alternative, but it requires me to find time to construct a graph, and that time has not yet appeared. Frustrating.

Tom Cloyd (talk) 17:27, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've re-discovered my user login, therefore you or anyone else can contact me there re: 84.12.125.50 (not that it seems I actually used it) MagicalThinking (talk) 07:13, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that must be cause of some relief for you. Now you have a name! (However, I hope the cognitive error of "magical thinking" is something in which you will NOT indulge!) Tom Cloyd (talk) 16:30, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Ex-gay movement

Responding to RFCs

Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Ex-gay movement. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and isnot a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot(talk) 07:43, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I will respond to this request.Tom Cloyd (talk) 11:02, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Falun Gong

Responding to RFCs

Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Falun Gong. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot(talk) 08:21, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Course mentioned at WP:AN

• Bob Boiko (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Hello Tom. A course taught by User:Bob Boiko that you are helping with has been mentioned at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Two university projects. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 14:46, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notice. I have responded on the Admin. noticeboard. Tom Cloyd (talk) 22:17, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]