User talk:Fav203

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Hello, Fav203, and Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking if shown; this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field with your edits. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Ronz (talk) 22:02, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Getting started
Getting help
Policies and guidelines

The community

Writing articles
Miscellaneous

Instructional design[edit]

I'm assuming you're working with the other editors on Instructional design? Please use edit summaries and perhaps some talk page discussion as well to make it clearer what you're doing. --Ronz (talk) 22:07, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia: check out the Teahouse![edit]

Teahouse logo
Hello! Fav203, you are invited to the Teahouse, a forum on Wikipedia for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and get support from peers and experienced editors. Please join us! Sarah (talk) 00:31, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Fav203, I hope you don't mind a few additional general tips (see also Talk:Educational technology for article-related comments). Please always edit logged in, and it would be helpful to post a short description of such an assignment before you start (for example on the affected article's talkpage). Also, a somewhat more important point: students should not add their own evaluation of source content into the article (see WP:OR and WP:SYNTH). Added information should stay as close as possible to the original source (of course summarizing the information in the editor's own words and skipping non-essential details), without adding new information that is not explicitly verifiable in the original source. In academic papers authors usually offer their own analysis, commentary and conclusions. But that's not what an encyclopedic article is for - just wanted to clarify this basic point to avoid possible future problems. The linked guidelines contain more info about this aspect, but please feel free to ask if you have any questions about this or other points. Best regards. GermanJoe (talk) 03:16, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

MasterClass Revisions[edit]

Hello, I'm the Director of Communications at MasterClass, an online education company. Because you are in education and focused on educational technology, I'm writing to see if you can please review my proposed content I shared on the Talk page here. I have posted it for general review and am asking you to review it as I have a conflict of interest working for the company. Is this something you could please help me with?

Thank you. BethMasterClass (talk) 22:29, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

YOUR MESSAGE BethMasterClass (talk) 16:13, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Wanted to send an update that ElKevbo made the edit. If you could please watchlist, I'd appreciate it. Thank you.