On 16/09/2011 03:26, Tony Sidaway wrote:
It appears that a study by a team at the Medical School at Thomas
Jefferson
University has found Wikipedia's cancer information to be very accurate
and
updated more frequently than other sources. Compared to professional
sources
such as PDQ,
Nice to know we are as accurate and more up-to-date than the competition.
I'd love to see further work done on the 2% of information where we
currently differ from the textbooks, hopefully most of that will just be
that the textbooks are out of date. But it would be good to have that
Today's featured article is all of 6 paragraphs long. Discuss.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MissingNo.
Carcharoth
Seems appropriate.
Fred
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
David Gerard wrote:
Johann Hari admits he did it.
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/johann-hari/johann-hari-a-personal-apology-2354679.html
- d.
I don't see socking here; he admits to using only one account, and he
doesn't appear to have an account in his own name.
I do
I have bought expensive academic books in the past, but never actual
published PhD theses. I would expect someone to rewrite, extend and
expand on their PhD thesis to make it suitable for a wider readership
before publishing it and expecting people to buy it. Many of the books
I've bought
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 6:03 PM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
wrote:
I've registered for this service and am downloading a thesis:
Queen Victoria : the monarch and the media 1837-1867
I have agreed to terms and conditions which provide that my copy is
only
for personal
I read the FAQ and noticed this:
Making the Early Journal Content freely available is something we
have planned to do for some time. It is not a direct reaction to the
Swartz and Maxwell situation, but recent events did have an impact on
our planning.
Anyone know what that is about?
According to their announcement not all material has been released yet.
It will be available in stages.
I was able to access an article in Science from May, 1910 which was quite
useful. It is footnote 2 in the article, San Luis Valley
Fred
The second two links work for guest users; the first
On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 9:45 PM, Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk
wrote:
I don't think we've discussed the outline of X articles much on this
list, which surprises me, but people might nonetheless be interested
in:
Nevertheless I wouldn't be surprised to see a billion dollar IPO for
either of them.
Fred
I think that it is also worth pointing out that, in my experience,
articles
on Hudong are pretty bad. They are poorly formatted, poorly written,
generally lack inline referencing, and often have
I hadn't heard of Hudong before. This article by Rebecca Fannin calls
it China's Wikipedia and says it has a 95% market share and more
than 5 million entries from 3.6 million contributors.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/rebeccafannin/2011/08/23/why-draper-funded-chinas-wikipedia/
English
I really dislike it. Socialization should be an implicit function of the
website software, not an explicit one.
NO SOUP FOR YOU!
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
Naw, let's trick em. Let's pretend to be friendly and appreciative for at
least two years.
Fred
As long as we don't start giving newcomers a false sense of appreciation
or accomplishment, which will end up hurting them more in the future, as
opposed to letting them know right away what they
Looks to me like they are referring to 94.193.122.119, registered to
London Clerkenwell Residential Dynamic.
Yes, thank you. I was looking for recent edits and couldn't find many.
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Special:Contributions/94.193.122.119
This is quite a treasure
And as usual, El Reg's coverage manages to be negative anyway. They
are truly a lesson to all of us. From
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/06/01/wikipedia_makes_students_do_better_work/
Yes, clearly, The Register would have opposed the wheel.
Fred
http://schema.org/
An initiative by Google, Yahoo and Bing to make a tag language to make
things more findable in search engines.
Is there anything in this for us? schema.org tags in templates?
Presumably this would require software work too, and require us to
cross levels between software
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 8:53 AM, Ken Arromdee arrom...@rahul.net wrote:
[...]
You can't neutrally discuss how a person is compared to shit. Not in
any
real-world sense.
I don't agree for a moment that we can't neutrally discuss how a
person is compared to shit. We can and in my opinion we
You are ascribing motive to Cirt's activities. Assume Good Faith.
This is starting to feel like something that should be dealt with by
interested parties engaging with each other, rather than researching on
wiki-en.
There is a on-wiki discussion and there will be more, but this:
By the
I've dropped Cirt a note and link to this thread, in case they weren't
aware
of it.
As mentioned before, what is at the root of this is a wider problem
though:
to what extent we as a project are happy to act as participants, rather
than
neutral observers and reporters, in the political
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 12:48 PM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@yahoo.com
wrote:
I've dropped Cirt a note and link to this thread, in case they weren't
aware
of it.
As mentioned before, what is at the root of this is a wider problem
though:
to what extent we as a project are happy to act as
I'm not surprised that a Wikipedia article shoots to the top of Google
searches, isn't that one of the reasons why we write here? I'm pretty
sure I've seen Wikipedia articles come top on Google even if they lack
templates and are practically orphans.
Nor am I surprised that someone who
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 23:57, Ken Arromdee arrom...@rahul.net wrote:
If there weren't any anti-scientology campaigners spreading the word
about
Xenu, we'd still have a reason to have an article about Xenu. If there
was
no
anti-Santorum campaign, we'd have no reason for the article--its
Again - I am not Cirt, and I find the article reasonably balanced.
Having an article that associates someone with human waste be reasonably
balanced is like claiming that an article about the Richard Gere gerbil
rumor (as long as it stated the rumor was false) would be reasonably
balanced.
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 7:31 PM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
wrote:
Again - I am not Cirt, and I find the article reasonably balanced.
Having an article that associates someone with human waste be
reasonably
balanced is like claiming that an article about the Richard Gere
gerbil
On 23/05/2011 03:56, geni wrote:
On 23 May 2011 02:24, Brian J Mingusbrian.min...@colorado.edu wrote:
When you Google for Santorum's last name this Wikipedia article is the
second result. This means that people who are looking for legitimate
information about him are not going to find it
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 4:47 PM, George Herbert
george.herb...@gmail.com wrote:
Many of the things we report on are unfortunate. An IMF
candidate who alledgedly raped a hotel maid
snip
Candidate? Last I looked, he was Managing Director of the IMF at the
time the story broke (he is now
We don't exist to fix the real world - we exist to report on it
accurately. Many of the things we report on are unfortunate. An IMF
candidate who alledgedly raped a hotel maid, a tornado that killed 89
plus people, a terrorist attack in Pakistan and several ongoing and
incipient wars,
I agree. Let's remove all content on Wikipedia about the Internet.
My God! Larry Sanger was right!
Fred
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
Hi all,
I'm not sure about the history of this article, but it it was recently
brought to my attention via Facebook.
My take on this article is that it is an abuse of Wikipedia's notability
guidelines. The article goes out of its way to cite lots of sources, but
I
do not believe that
On Tue, 17 May 2011, David Gerard wrote:
The new site has indeed had about 0 verifiable third-party coverage.
But the problem is that it's being treated as a new site and therefore
all
the notability and such has to start from scratch. How do we determine
that
something remains the same
Well I would love to provide you very very examples of where I
attempted to fix the problems there.
The wikpedia loves to claim being NPOV but in fact in kosovo there is
a total bent, just compare the de.en,sq and sr wikis via translation,
each of them has its own POV and subscribes to some
10:20, 29 April 2011 Jimbo Wales (talk | contribs) m (37,376 bytes)
(moved Kate Middleton to Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge over
redirect: Marriage to the Duke of Cambridge) (undo)
He must have had his finger on the button waiting for Beardie[*] to
pronounce them man and wife...
[*] I
on wikipedia?
To be able to add reliable interesting information have it remain
available to the public.
4) How would you define online volunteerism?
Working for public benefit
5) Do you support another platform as an online volunteer?
Wikinfo.org a fork of Wikipedia
Fred Bauder
Thank you very much
Knowino is a good project, folks.
Fred
Hello folks!
Most of you are probably familiar with Citizendium, the competitor to
Wikipedia that Larry Sanger started back in 2006. Citizendium is now
dying under the weight of a massive bureaucracy, which was landed upon
the project either far too
Brown found that all of the verifiable biographical information in those
articles was completely accurate. (candidates for governor of U.S.
states)
http://scienceblog.com/44345/wikipedia-a-reliable-source-for-political-info-study-says/
Adam R. Brown
PS: Political Science Politics / Volume 44 /
Sad indeed. I am not entirely convinced Conservapedia is even maintained
by conservatives. Most of the stuff I've seen on there looks as though
it was designed to poke fun at conservatives, rather than to represent
us accurately.
And Glen Beck is a Stalinist intent on discrediting resistance
of
Wikipedia, the inclusionists will have it not rejected.
But it would be interesting to see a search option:
Do you want to see everything (WP+WP2), or only the notable(W)?
Anyone care to guess which people would choose?
--
David Goodman
Yes, let's do that.
Fred Bauder
On 7 April 2011 21:56, MuZemike muzem...@gmail.com wrote:
Perhaps I'm missing the point, but isn't that what we have been doing
so
far (i.e. with all the other sister Wikimedia projects)?
Yes, but also other niches Wikipedia leaves. Wikia, for example,
started to form wikis of any sort,
I dread to think how many megabytes of discussion are spent on
discussing
nationalities.
So why are you discussing it?
Meta discussions about problems sometimes result in progress.
For example, I've been looking at another article, Astrology, where half
a dozen astrology advocates have
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 3:44 PM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
wrote:
WikiProject Rational Skepticism High-importance) Really?
Astrology is one of the oldest and, amazingly enough, still most
popular foes of skepticism. If they don't consider it
'High-importance' then what
suggesting it as an editing tool.
Fred Bauder
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On 28 March 2011 11:53, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:
A site, where for $1,000, corrections to one's Wikipedia article can be
posted:
For $1,000, Site Lets Celebrities Say It Aint So
https://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/28/world/europe/28icorrect.html?ref=todayspaper
If you search
On 28 March 2011 14:40, Scott MacDonald doc.wikipe...@ntlworld.com
wrote:
Geni,
It might help if you checked you own facts before making false claims:
I quote:
It is fundamental for ICorrect to confirm the true identity of each
Corrector. Therefore ICorrect requires a reliable reference
I think you're going a bit overboard there, Doc. I agree that the
claims of the subject shouldn't be ignored, particularly if they spend
$1000 to publish a correction on a startup site (as long as we can
confirm it is them). But should it count as a reliable reference to
trigger a chance in
On 28 Mar 2011 at 12:00, Fred Bauder wrote:
A site, where for $1,000, corrections to one's Wikipedia article can be
posted:
Did Andrew Knight really pay $1000 to write Wikipedia entry is
anodyne and largely accurate. Never mind, let's keep it that way?
== Dan ==
I assume he had issues
So, any reasonable solution is good. If we were to actually encourage
the creation of one - presuming this site isn't quite what we're after
- how would it work? This might be a good opportunity to encourage an
independent but useful right of reply project...
--
- Andrew Gray
On 28 March 2011 16:13, Victor Vasiliev vasi...@gmail.com wrote:
OTRS is not that bad, at least as far as I know. The volunteers there
are supposed to be friendly (at least polite) as long as the person
does not behave very aggresively. The only problem I am aware of is
backlog
On 28 March 2011 15:46, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
However, noting what the subject says is surely apposite in the
general case, even if it's delusional - as long as it can be
reasonably cited in a source that is almost certainly said subject.
Not really the case article in
On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 7:55 PM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
wrote:
A personal note from the subject needs to be added, and accepted, as
reference. It is by most authors and editors, for appropriate matters.
Fred
Where do you suggest to store it?
--vvv
refNote from [subject
On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 4:59 PM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
wrote:
On 28 March 2011 16:00, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote:
You see the problem?
Do I ever.
Fred, a couple of points:
1) You missed out the attribution to geni when you reposted what he
said (you made it look like
Good grief, Carcharoth, there it is! Brilliant!
I've been stumbling about for years looking for a way to differentiate
between legitimate encyclopaedic biography, which Wikipedia should do,
and
the problematic, armature-journalistic, selectively biased, originally
researched, WP:NOTNEWS
On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 11:05 AM, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote:
On 28 March 2011 15:34, Scott MacDonald doc.wikipe...@ntlworld.com
wrote:
E-mail OTRS and you're dealing
with a non-editorial non-authority, who might not believe who you are,
and
probably won't accept your own testimony as
. So I run, I run as fast as I can. And you
And you can't catch me. I am I am the fastest. You can't You can't get
me.
There will always be people adding interesting material to Wikipedia.
Fred
On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 7:47 PM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
wrote:
I couldn't find an obituary
Fred,
I'm failing to see the connection between a chap born in 1870 and our BLP
policy. You perhaps can't find an obituary, but I'm pretty sure he's
dead.
Scott
Articles about living people strung together from press coverage can be
troublesome. That is due to the nature of the press,
On 28/03/2011, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 28 March 2011 20:15, Carcharoth carcharot...@googlemail.com wrote:
My other theory is that writing stand-alone articles is not a good
thing in the long-run. Articles should be created if there is a demand
for the articles from people
The real problem is that people are perfectly willing to lie about
themselves. I never slept with that woman. I don't fund the Tea
Party.
I'm not a hypocrite. etc. etc.
You're only getting warm; the real problem is that they believe it.
Fred
___
'Being really good at it' is subversion when they aren't actually really
good at it, they just disregard the rules. I wont speak for George, but
yes,
doing it in secret makes me think they *are* adding bias. If this is
upstanding, good work, they would do it in view with open communication.
Did he say he was working for Koch's PR firm?
No, and it is still not clear if that was his assignment from the firm.
I've left a note on his user talk page asking him to clarify this if he
returns to editing.
Fred
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 2:19 PM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
wrote
I think I've asked this before, but I'm raising it again as I've
noticed templates being used again within articles to allowed finer
control over specific parts of article content. This practice of using
templates within articles for the actual text of articles is something
I think should be
The thing is, it takes a conspiracy within the Wikipedia's rank and
file to bias an article significantly over a long period; otherwise
normal editing and then RFCs and so forth will tend sort it out.
If it remains sufficiently inaccurate then the target will kick up a
big fuss; initially
The article doesn't say that a conspiracy within Wikipedia tried to bias
articles. It says that a prominent industrialist and political
contributor
paid professional writers to alter Wikipedia articles to change the
descriptions of his involvement in a political movement.
It's a situation
It is possible to provide arguments against the reliability of any
source whatever. (And in the other direction, it is possible to take
most sources and selectively quote them to provide evidence for
support for any position whatever.) It is possible to destroy the
integrity of any article by
Of course, if an interested minority party has effectively infinite
money,
they can start to tip the scales.
If they can benefit from LOTS of negative PR...
Fred
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this
The Koch brothers are mostly unknown. It is a known fact that they have
at
least one professional PR firm (New Media Strategies) working to monitor
their Wikipedia presence. That's certainly within their rights, and can
be
within the Wikipedia rules. It is Ken's assertion that there are
MBMadmirer was never
unblocked. The only basis he could be blocked on, in my opinion, is
Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest#Blocks and I'm not sure he actually
engaged in behavior that was disruptive enough to actually justify that.
Fred Bauder
___
WikiEN
A discussion about this matter, which we have discussed some here:
Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#MBMadmirer
Fred
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
On 09/03/2011 23:24, Tony Sidaway wrote:
Think Progress, a progressive blog run by the Center for American
Progress, today ran a story about a hired PR firm creating sock puppet
accounts to clean up Wikipedia articles for the Koch brothers.
If true, this will only get messier as the
This is typical sophomoric writing, sometimes literally done by 2nd year
students, actual sophomores. It is not limited to math; my particular pet
peeve is our philosophy articles.
A skilled teacher with years of experience teaching at the college level
can often make such subjects much more
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 3:15 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 17 February 2011 14:16, Carcharoth carcharot...@googlemail.com
wrote:
So some might object to your use of the term sophomore, but the rest I
agree with. You need people who have experience explaining things to
make
10 controversial Wikipedia topics:
http://www.deseretnews.com/top/97/10-controversial-Wikipedia-topics.html
Wiki Wars: In battle to define beliefs, Mormons and foes wage battle on
Wikipedia:
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700105517/
Fred
___
High motivation for making decent open-source images available:
http://searchengineland.com/updating-google-image-results-for-online-reputation-management-63965
Fred
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this
Most humans see the world their own way and there's very little
standardization going on.
Fred
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-12400647
Robots could soon have an equivalent of the internet and Wikipedia.
Do you think they will let humans edit their Wikipedia?
Carcharoth
Wi-fi is the obvious solution for libraries. We've made the entire
downtown area of Crestone into a hot spot, not by plan, just by natural
growth of cafes and other nodes. The result is lots of people who gather
and use their laptops to stay connected.
Fred
Around here (here being Evansville,
I'm quite willing to contact them, afd each article on their list, and if
consensus is that any merit deletion, I will donate the proceeds to the
WMF.
Scott
I've tried bidding on that basis myself; it is futile. They want someone
who breaks, or at least manipulates the rule, not someone that
It would be instructive to know what articles they are worried about and
why. I find that most people wanting articles deleted have a good reason
and, while deletion may not be justified by Wikipedia's rules, there
are
often problems with the articles that we ought to address.
People
I've always found the problem with Wikipedia is that it has components
which
usually work remarkably well together (wiki, open editing, no-privileged
editors, neutrality, verifiability, quality) but since it has never
defined
which of these is core and which is the means to the end, on the
On 4 February 2011 01:32, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:
One is expected to use sound editorial judgment. Using British tabloids
for a biography of a living person falls outside that remit. One is
expected to have some familiarity with what is an appropriate source
for
the subject
On 4 February 2011 01:32, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:
One is expected to use sound editorial judgment. Using British
tabloids
for a biography of a living person falls outside that remit. One is
expected to have some familiarity with what is an appropriate source
I think we also need to take into account what the subject is and type
of information.
I wouldn't trust one of our fleet street tabloids for a WWII bomber
found on the moon story, and I was somewhat cynical about the
following week's WWII bomber mysteriously disappears from the Moon
We have a policy about not spreading gossip, but I see little evidence
that
we adhere to it.
Andreas
After such examples are found they still need to be edited. The editing
community varies in its tolerance, experience, and compliance. What in
one context might slip though will not in
What we look like to a discouraged editor:
http://ploum.net/post/222-why-i-don-t-contribute-to-wikipedia-anymore
Note the blogs as reference issue.
Fred
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearchredirs=1search=t
hesun.co.uk+%22Living+people%22fulltext=Searchns0=1title=Special%3ASearch
advanced=1fulltext=Advanced+search
'Nuff said.
Scott
Said but not done. We need to take a good look at this, and similar uses
of dubious
In other words, the more tabloid sources we cite, the more editors we
attract who like tabloids, while turning off those potential contributors
who don't read tabloids.
Andreas
We are already nastier then we need to be or ought to be to ordinary
people who try to edit. We are not going in
Also, some of those media references may be obituaries,
which are a
different sort of source to news articles.
While Lessing was born in 1919, last time I looked she was still alive.
;)
Tough old bird.
Our article talks about her dalliances with communism, feminism, and
sufism,
and
That's a valid and subtle point. It's compounded by the fact that the
more
heavyweight sources tend to be more restrained in their tone, and the
more
lightweight sources, more shrill and emotive.
NPOV as presently defined does not help us there: we are duty-bound to
reflect the shrill
On Fri, 4 Feb 2011, Fred Bauder wrote:
Clearly there are issues. I'm on Jimbo's side with this though. Some of
my earliest edit wars were over whether The People's Republic of China
could be described in the introduction as a totalitarian dictatorship.
What has currently been hit
with what is an appropriate source for
the subject.
Fred Bauder
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
so this leaves this proposed council with a responsibility to mediate
policy disputes and the authority to decide a deadlock in favor of a
strong majority based on strength of arguement and core values
(openness transparency etc) - this would basically end up being a
fairly weak system
many chores involved with that.
Fred Bauder
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Fred, this authority could bring order to the present chaos. As for my
proposals, I have none that are fully formed. I would hope to work them
out
with persons who also believe this change is necessary.
This is for Stephanie: I had trouble reading your post the way it came
formatted on my
of time so that patterns of behavior become apparent.
-Stephanie
Brilliant!
Fred Bauder
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On 1 February 2011 17:30, Marc Riddell michaeldavi...@comcast.net
wrote:
Fred, you still haven't answered my questions. I see the term
consensus
and, especially, the term community consensus used in many contexts
on
this and other Lists. But what does it mean? And by what means is that
On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 5:35 PM, Stephanie Daugherty
sdaughe...@gmail.com wrote:
That means we need a stronger executive that can decide
to break deadlocks when they happen, or lend structure to debate so
that it can run it's course, as appropriate for the situation.
These are the two
My own simple solution would be to elect a policy advisory committee
*The PAC would only consider policy areas, and only as a last resort,
where the status-quo did not enjoy evident consensus, but where repeated
community attempts to resolve the problem had proved futile.
*The PAC by
, Fred Bauder at fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:
We discuss policy issues at length, consider the reasons for adopting
alternatives, and come to agreement.
C'mon Fred, isn't that rather vague? What I'm asking (again) is, after
the
discussion is other, how is it determined that a consensus
, Fred Bauder at fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:
We discuss policy issues at length, consider the reasons for
adopting
alternatives, and come to agreement.
C'mon Fred, isn't that rather vague? What I'm asking (again) is,
after
the
discussion is other, how is it determined that a consensus
On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 7:00 PM, Marc Riddell
michaeldavi...@comcast.net
wrote:
People agree and support the decision.
Fred, who are these people that are making these decisions and
declaring
that there in Community consensus, knowing that this consensus
cannot be
factually validated?
Wilfred Bion)
Fred Bauder
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
on 1/18/11 2:10 PM, Fred Bauder at fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:
The importance to the individual of collaborating within a group. And
the
importance to the group in recognizing, and nurturing, the individual.
From:
Amy Chua Is a Wimp
By DAVID BROOKS
Published: January 17, 2011
NYT
Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2011 08:55:17 -0700 (MST)
From: Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
From today's newspaper:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/01/health/01care.html?ref=todayspaper
Creating positive emotional experiences diminishes distress and
behavior
problems.
Fred Bauder
Fred, surely you're
101 - 200 of 412 matches
Mail list logo
