User talk:Jcautilli2003

Welcome!

Hello, Jcautilli2003, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. 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. Again, welcome! Josh.Pritchard.DBA (talk) 20:08, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion on Professional practice of behavior analysis[edit]

I have added a question on the PPBA talk page for ya. Josh.Pritchard.DBA (talk) 23:51, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral Point of View[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. Please remember to observe our core policies. Thank you. I revised some of your contributions for Direct Instruction to bring them in line with Wikipedia's NPOV policy. It's important to always attribute opinions to the person who said them, rather than stating them as fact.

For example, I changed this statement: "The study was also flawed because the DI group had many more boys, and the results failed to be replicated with a larger sample." to this: "Mills, Cole, Jenkins, and Dale say that the DISTAR study was also flawed because the DI group had many more boys, and the results failed to be replicated with a larger sample." I'm assuming that's where it is stated, but I don't have access to the full article. Please correct my change if I'm wrong and Mills et al don't actually say that.

I cleaned this sentence up a bit (it wasn't commissioned by the DOJ, and says so on the first page). I don't understand what you're saying here though. Can you please reword this so it's a bit clearer? "A meta-analysis of research studies in this area which includes this study shows no universal difference between behavioral programs used as prevention and counseling, social skills or cognitive programs for the reduction of aggression and building social skills."

Thanks! WeisheitSuchen (talk) 00:56, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Child sexual abuse[edit]

Per your request, I have reverted the Child sexual abuse page to prior to your first edit.

Before you resume editing that page, please note, it is a controversial topic and there is a lot of activity and discussion in progress. The edits you made were too extensive and too fast, for that particular page, even if not for the reference mistake that caused the formatting error.

If you edit articles about topics related that one, you might want to take a look at these pages too, so you can get perspective on what's involved:

Please take it slow with those topics and don't do lots of changes at once on any one page. Make your reference citations especially clear so they can be checked, preferably link to the pages that include support for any content you add.

Also, you've added many links during the last week, to two websites, www.behavior-analyst-online.org and www.behavior-analyst-today.com.

It appears that you may be the publisher of the the journals you added as references. If I'm mistaken about that, please correct me. But if that is the situation, please read the Wikipedia guideline at this link:

Wikipedia:Conflict of interest.

This does not mean you are not allowed to use those references, it could be fine, I don't know. I'm just referring you to the policy so you can learn about how it works.

Happy editing... --Jack-A-Roe (talk) 06:21, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again - I saw your reply on the article talk page, so no need to respond further here unless you want to. Generally, if I leave a message on someone's talk page, I'll keep an eye out for a reply, so if you do want to add something, you can write it here.

Also, if you have any questions at any time, you are welcome to leave a message on my talk page. --Jack-A-Roe (talk) 06:34, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ABA[edit]

Hello,

I have added the section you asked for regarding reinforcement. I was thinking the same thing when looking at it. Let me know what you think, and if there are any other topics you feel are missing. --Svernon (talk) 03:53, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent thatnks Jcautilli2003 (talk) 04:19, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Historical controversies in ABA[edit]

Hi,

Were you moving the historical controversies section on the ABA page to a different page? Because it really should be kept on the page and the only real spot for it I can see is the section that it was already in. WLU (talk) 00:12, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I moved it to the page for professional issues in behavior analysis as was suggsted by the tom guy. Check it out there and letme know what you think. It is linked to the page from the ABA page under links Jcautilli2003 (talk) 01:22, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the address http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_practice_of_behavior_analysis Let me know what oyu think. Jcautilli2003 (talk) 01:24, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Child life specialist page[edit]

I noticed your work on the Child development page and I value your thoughts on my own page! I'm a relatively new user, and I just created the Child life specialist page. I'm wondering if you would check it out and possible give me a bit of feedback on the page? Thanks for your help! Carleyj (talk) 01:30, 29 April 2008 (UTC)carleyj[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:42, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]