User talk:Ashley Suk

Hi Ashley, here's my feedback on your choices:

Catastrophic schizophrenia <-- definitely needs some work. Could be a good one.

Waxy flexibility <-- could be good, although it's almost too obscure/specific. I wonder how much research you'd be able to find on it.

Thought broadcasting <-- see comment above

Cognitive slippage <-- see comment for waxy flexibility.

Racing thoughts <-- needs to be expanded, and should be not as obscure as the previous three, so probably a better choice.

ScottPKingPhD (talk) 17:49, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome[edit]

Hello, Ashley Suk and welcome to Wikipedia! It appears you are participating in a class project. If you haven't done so already, we encourage you to go through our training for students. Your instructor or professor may wish to set up a course page, if your class doesn't already have one.

Go through our online training for students.

If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{Helpme}} before the question.

Before you create an article, make sure you understand what kind of articles are accepted here. Remember: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and while many topics are encyclopedic, some things are not.

It is highly recommended that you place this text: {{Educational assignment}} on the talk page of any articles you are working on as part of your Wikipedia-related course assignment. This will let other editors know this article is a subject of an educational assignment and should be treated accordingly.

We hope you like it here and encourage you to stay even after your assignment is finished!

Lova Falk talk 07:18, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Editing Dance Therapy Page[edit]

Thanks for your help but here is some feedback: 1. as for neutrality is was really one sided when I started and really all opinion and no facts. 2. the list was a list in the reference 3. the neg. section says that no neg. have been reported(in my opinion probably b/c it is tapered for each individual even in group settings) 4.thanks for fixing the references i han't a clue where they were to go 5."first wave"/waves sections i have nothing to do with 6. allied professions is what the article used

Hope you done think I'm being offensive....and no you don't come off as harsh. 3faith.hope.love (talk) 04:13, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review[edit]

Hey Ashley, Im assuming that this artical was basically bare when you started. You have done a good job so far bringing it up to speed so to say. One thing I wanted to say was a couple of your sources are confusing. I dont know if you didnt have enough info for them or what the story is, but they dont look like the Wiki cite style. If that makes any sense. Other then that good work.GLKeepr1 (talk) 02:10, 21 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Help us improve the Wikipedia Education Program[edit]

Hi Ashley Suk! As a student editor on Wikipedia, you have a lot of valuable experience about what it's like to edit as a part of a classroom assignment. In order to help other students like you enjoy editing while contributing positively to Wikipedia, it's extremely helpful to hear from real student editors about their challenges, successes, and support needs. Please take a few minutes to answer these questions by clicking below. (Note that the responses are posted to a public wiki page.) Thanks!

Delivered on behalf of User:Sage Ross (WMF), 17:08, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]